
Class //) ${> 
Book - C 1% 
Copyright^ 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSm 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW 
OF SOCIALISM 



THE AUTHOR OF 
'FROM BOYHOOD TO manhood' 



WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY 

BENJAMIN PAUL BLOOD 



NEW YORK 

PARKE, AUSTIN & LIPSCOMB, Inc. 
MCMXVI 



^ 



c* 



Copyright, 1916, by 
PARKE, AUSTIN & LIPSCOMB, Inc. 



if 



tP- 



JAN 20 1916 

>C!.A418543 

"HO , I . 






"For the cause that lacks assistance. 
For the wrongs that need resistance, 
For the future in the distance, 
For the good that I can do" 



CONTENTS 

CHAPTER PAGE 

Introduction ix 

A Foreword xvii 

I. Socialism 3 

II. Trades Unions 25 

III. Slavery 47 

IV. Hate 5S 

V. Capitalists 71 

VI. The Farmer 115 

VII. The Democratic Republic . . 151 

VIII. Education 207 



INTRODUCTION 

An " introduction" of course: not wholly as 
a concession to good form, but as an ensign, 
or an advance guard. The Hero shall have 
his herald — his heroship may not be quite 
self-evident. The Nation wears its flag, as 
the savage wears his feather and his beads; 
the State has its coat of arms, and every 
Association has its motto, as a raison d'etre. 
The vignette of the present monogram shall 
be a little picture — I call it 

A Poor Home. 

The Reader has seen such? — weeds in the 
dooryard — the gate on one hinge — a pane 
broken in the window; within, a woman lean 
and worked out, " bone-weary, many-childed, 
trouble-tried " (as Ebenezer Elliott described 
his wife!), with maybe on the mantel one 
poor little geranium in a broken pot, to link 
her still to the world of beauty and the hope 

[ix] 



INTRODUCTION 



of glory. In such a home, by a bare table on 
a naked floor, a Workingman leans his head 
upon his hand. Beside him a young girl, bare- 
footed and thinly clad, calls his attention with 
her hand upon his knee: 

"Papa!" 

"What is it, Nellie ?" 

"Papa, why don't you work — 'n Nellie 
wants shoes, 'n Mamma needs her medicine?" 

Why doesn't he work! not, why doesn't 
he play, or go to the ball game, or the movies; 
for this Man, in the agonism of a helpless pater- 
nity, there is not even "the curse of service." 

This in the twentieth century of Christian- 
ity, and the seventieth of "civilization," 
when greed and selfishness have achieved a 
superabundance of production, yet when even 
the best good will is powerless for legitimate 
distribution ! Powerless simply. 

The Author of this book speaks for a class 
(and I realize that it is the habit of gentlemen 
[x] 



INTRODUCTION 



to believe one another) when he says that 
Capital as such — even as its own best policy — 
would cheerfully alleviate the stress of pov- 
erty and unemployment, if it only knew how. 
Even taxation is not yet a science. Assume 
that it were wise and patriotic for the Gov- 
ernment to give general employment by in- 
ternal improvement and ornamentation, to 
be sustained by a tax upon income and in- 
heritance; nevertheless an astute legislator re- 
cently said: "Show me any law that involves 
the taxation of a mortgage or a bond and I 
will drive a yoke of oxen through it." 

Charity must become a science, or it will 
henceforth, as heretofore, be worse than 
futile; it will but foster idleness and vice. 
The capitalist who has earned, not inherited, 
his wealth — the man who knows what suc- 
cess is made of — the man of means and ends, 
of the quid pro quo and the "square deal," 
has learned that the most efficient method of 
lightening a burden is to stiffen the back that 

[xi] 



INTRODUCTION 



bears it. The problem of philanthropy has 
grown with the race. Once the Master could 
well say, "Give to him that asketh!" and He 
himself "went about doing good." His was 
the day of the sickle and the wooden plow; 
ours is the day of the twine binder and the 
gasoline gang. We can fly and we can dive, 
ad libitum, but we cannot thwart the cohesive 
power of organized graft. The luxurious 
quarters of all our missionary effort show that 
with our most exacting measurement some 
of the syrup will adhere to the mug. 

The British Government freely furnished 
sufficient food to have at least beneficently 
qualified the famine in India, but the words 
of Lord Clive came true, that "east of Suez 
the sentiment of personal honor is unknown." 
Hinted threats of crucifixion and even of burn- 
ing alive failed to coerce the thieving native 
agents to deliver the bounty to the mouths 
for which it was intended. Can we wonder 
then that, when sortie canting charity ap- 
[xii] 



INTRODUCTION 



proaches a practical capitalist with a prospec- 
tus guarantying to furnish "one copy of the 
sacred Scriptures, one flannel shirt and one 
hairbrush to every heathen of Borio-boola- 
gha, one of the Foo-foo islands/' his answer 
is, " Nothing doing!"? 

At a time when Capitalism is openly re- 
proached as an exploitation of Labor, back 
into which it should be resolved and integrated 
at the expense of individual ambition, ini- 
tiative and comprehensive genius; when vul- 
gar equality and fraternity are rated above 
aesthetic excellence and distinction, as if 
man could live by bread alone, this brief 
treatise is obviously issued as a protest 
against what is deemed and exalted as the 
u ideal" of Socialism — but which the author re- 
gards rather as an inconsequent dream that 
does not realize its own meaning — and also as a 
defenceof the Capitalist class from objurgations 
born of prejudice and ignorant inexperience. 

The Author is a Capitalist easy enough — 
[ xiii ] 



INTRODUCTION 



some think a multi-capitalist — but he regards 
his personal identity as irrelevant at this 
time; and at best it could but abet the manifest 
assurance that this book is cordially intended 
to do some good. He is known to have had 
more and other than the common experience, 
and to have felt the rounds of its ladder at 
both ends; and now, when "the westering 
pathos glooms the fervent hours/' he feels it 
just and becoming to give as has been given 
him, with no more pretension than has come 
from a rather voluminous and miscellaneous 
correspondence. The author does not pose 
as a highbrow (whatever that may be); he 
regards himself simply as a Capitalist; but 
to the judicious, who can read between the 
lines — to the expert who can forecast the im- 
pact of a missile by the height it falls from — 
there will appear in these leisurely pages a 
generous spirit which prosperity could never 
spoil, and a native force and sagacity which, 
unwearied by the strenuous life, react and 
[xivj 



INTRODUCTION 



overflow for the good of humanity with the 
world-wisdom which has been at once the 
growth and the secret of a phenomenal suc- 
cess. These pages are mighty good reading, 
even in the present times, to those who are 
advised as to the war which, like the poor, 
is "always with us," and is only overshadowed 
for the moment by the belligerent headlines 
in the latest version of the same old type of 
Social Discontent. 

Benj. Paul Blood. 



A FOREWORD 

In writing this book I have been impressed 
with the sinister and persistent heterogen- 
eity of the race. We are homogeneous in one 
sense : that there is a kind of king enthroned 
within each individual. We may call this his 
self-interest. Socialism is ostensibly attempt- 
ing to bring forth out of this heterogeneous 
mass a homogeneous birth, while still con- 
tending that labor and capital have nothing 
in common. She has neglected, and is neg- 
lecting, the most important maieutic prepara- 
tion. Not only is this important, but it is 
vital; without it a still birth is inevitable. 

I have introduced myself to the philoso- 
phers (I do not claim an acquaintance with 
them), and have read and heard enough to 
convince me that Sociology is a science that 
the Socialist has neglected to study. The 
[ xvii ] 



A FOREWORD 



social instinct is common to man and animal. 
When Socialists attempt to separate society 
into opposing classes, in accordance with their 
doctrine, they are striking at one of the foun- 
tain heads of happiness; how can they expect 
in such a case to make very much progress? 
Their heterogeneous ideas and differences of 
opinion show conclusively, to my mind, that 
at the feet of this most vital science they will 
stumble and finally fall. They betray a most 
stupid and ignorant conception of life — a 
lack of philosophical thought as well as of 
practicability. 

There are some things we do know, one of 
which is, that when men are not in social 
contact with each other there is a tendency 
to further separation; and another is, that 
when they do associate with each other there 
accrues a warmth of feeling sometimes sur- 
prising, even astonishing. 

"The social smile, the sympathetic tear." — Gray. 
[ xviii ] 



A FOREWORD 



Sociology seemingly does not mean, to the 
Socialists, responsibility to all their fellow 
creatures, but only to those of their own be- 
lief. If responsibility is one of the signs of an 
advance in society it should not be clouded 
by an attempted separation of men into 
classes. One cannot divide a country with- 
out weakening it. No part is equal to the 
whole. One cannot claim with any sort of 
reason that the conservation of energy is in- 
advisable. Antagonism is a waste; only one 
side of it can succeed. There should be found 
some amicable way along the line of least 
resistance. 

I am speaking of Socialists as a class; not 
of the extreme W. D. Haywood, the less ex- 
treme Daniel de Leon, or the moderate John 
Spargo type, but as striking an average. 
The reader may place himself where he prefers. 

There is a deep mystery of life, one of its 
underlying principles in the evolution of man, 
that is often lost sight of. For thousands 
[xix] 



A FOREWORD 



of years the few have ruled the many, and 
they will doubtless continue so to rule for 
thousands of years to come. One may at- 
tribute this process to a divine power, or he 
may hold with Darwin, Spencer, or Huxley 
that it is natural in its origin ; but this thought 
adumbrates what I mean by a study of the 
science of Sociology. Instead of this, Eco- 
nomics is being investigated and made the 
main issue in Socialism. This study is sur- 
face philosophy — good enough, but not deep 
enough. We must understand man before 
we can formulate a good plan for his guidance, 
and the more perfect our understanding is, 
of course the more perfect will be the plan. 

Enlightened self-interest, selfishness modi- 
fied by far-sighted concessions to opposing 
interests, is my position. 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 



CHAPTER I 

SOCIALISM 

Socialism is used with a great variety of 
meaning, but for my purpose I shall place 
all those believing in that doctrine under the 
head of Socialists. I am fully aware that 
the so-called Socialists (some of whom are so 
near democracy that they scarcely cast a 
shadow) claim to be a different sort of individ- 
uals from members of the I. W. W.; and the 
latter repudiate the former, while they, in 
turn, repudiate one another. Still, I shall 
treat them in this book as one; in the same 
manner as the different church denomina- 
tions are called Christian. 

"Socialism is a theory of civil polity that 
aims to secure the reconstruction of society, 

[3] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

an increase of wealth, and a more equal dis- 
tribution of the products of labor, through 
the public collective ownership of land and 
capital (as distinguished from property), and 
the public collective management of all in- 
dustries — often popularly but erroneously ap- 
plied to communism/' — The Students 9 Stand- 
ard Dictionary. 

This Socialism seeks to form an ideal state, 
as an ultimate object of attainment; a model; 
a type. In order that it may succeed, it 
must also be practical; or, in other words, 
the practical must be worked into the ideal 
of Socialism, as laid down in our definition. 
It has as its aim the comradeship of men, 
and therefore has a noble object. 

There are possibly as many different con- 
ceptions of Socialism as there are different 
beliefs in religion. For two thousand years 
the Christians have not been able to under- 
stand one another perfectly, and it may be 

[4] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

four thousand years before the Socialists shall 
come to an understanding, for the circle 
seems to be widening instead of contracting. 
This shows a weakness, and implies to my 
mind a lack of the practical and an excess of 
the ideal. 

Socialism in this country may be roughly 
divided as follows : 

(i) The Industrial Workers of the World, 
of Chicago. 

(2) The Industrial Workers of the World, 
of Detroit. 

(3) The Socialist Labor Party. 

(4) The Socialist Party. 

(5) The Christian Socialist Party. 

The Savior of all these sects is Karl Marx. 
Between the five classes there is a connection 
which may be compared to the merging colors 
of a rainbow. The Socialistic spectrum 
extends by broadly marked yet blending 
gradations from the extremity which is 
occupied by the bold "reds," who are anar- 

[5] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

chists in spirit if not in philosophic theory, to 
the delicate violet band known also as "parlor" 
or "rose-water" Socialists. 

The first class are Socialists who declare 
themselves as follows : 

"The I. W. W. is not a political organi- 
zation in the sense that political organizations 
are to-day understood. It is not an anti- 
political sect. It is not a reform body. Its 
membership is not made up of anarchists, as 
some writers have stated. Its ranks are not 
exclusively composed of Socialists, as others 
have asserted. True, some of its members 
may have accepted the anarchist philosophy. 
Others may have accepted the Socialist faith. 
However, to the organization of the Indus- 
trial Workers of the World they are known 
only as workers, as members of the working 
class." — Page 2, "The Revolutionary L W. 
W." by Grover H. Perry. 

They also believe in the "complete sur- 
[6] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

render of all control of industry to the or- 
ganized workers." — Page 12, " The I. W. W. 

Its History, Structure and Methods" by Vin- 
cent St. John. 

They also propose these as their tactics or 
methods : 

"As a revolutionary organization the In- 
dustrial Workers of the World aim to use 
any and all tactics that will get the results 
sought with the least expenditure of time and 
energy. The tactics used are determined 
solely by the power of the organization to 
make good in their use. The questions of 
'right' and 'wrong' do not concern us." — Page 

17, Idem. 

"Failing to force concessions from the em- 
ployers by the strike, work is resumed and 
'sabotage' is used to force the employers to 
concede the demands of the workers." — Page 

18, Idem. 

[7] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The second is an economic organization. 
Members of this party are Socialists, who be- 
lieve, according to literature issued from De- 
troit on March 8, 191 5 : 

"By education and organization we work 
to secure those changes in social and indus- 
trial affairs which we recognize as necessary 
to secure for the working class all it should 
have. We advocate the use of political action, 
but through a separate organization ; we have 
no connection with any political party — this is 
left for the individual decision of the members/ 5 
— "Preamble and Constitution" {Chicago 9 s) — /. 
W. W. Booklet, page 5, section 2. 

They also announce : 

"The Industrial Workers of the World 
shall be composed of actual wage-workers, 
brought together in an organization embody- 
ing thirteen National Industrial Departments, 
composed of: 

[8] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Department of Mining Industry, 
Department of Transportation Industry, 
Department of Metal and Machinery In- 
dustry, 
Department of Glass and Pottery Industry, 
Department of the Foodstuffs Industry, 
Department of Brewery, Wine and Distil- 
lery Industry, 
Department of Floricultural, Stock, and Gen- 
eral Farming Industries, 
Department of Building Industry, 
Department of the Textile Industries, 
Department of the Leather Industries, 
Department of the Wood-Working Industries, 
Department of Public Service Industries, 
Department of Miscellaneous Manufacturing. 
— Idem, section 4. 

"The financial and industrial affairs of each 
National Industrial Department shall be con- 
ducted by an Executive Board of not less than 
seven (7) nor more than twenty-one (21), se- 
lected and elected by the general membership 
of said National Industrial Department, pro- 
vided that the Executive Board and general 

[9] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

membership of the said National Industrial 
Department shall be at all times subordinate 
to the General Executive Board of the In- 
dustrial Workers of the World, subject to 
appeal, and provided that the expenses of 
such referendum shall be borne by the Na- 
tional Industrial Departments, or National 
Industrial Union, or Unions, involved/ 5 — 
Idem, section 5. 

They believe that the working class and the 
employing class have nothing in common. 
They claim that the workers are slaves. 
They believe it to be their duty to organize 
" to stop the robbery of the product of labor 
— the source of the Millionaire and other 
parasites who force millions to toil long hours 
at the verge of starvation." — Pamphlet of I. 
W. W.: "One Union for all Wage- Workers." 

The third is a political organization, the 
members of which are Socialists who believe 

[10] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

that "where the General Executive Board 
of the Industrial Workers of the World will 
sit, there will be the nation's capital" [where 
the Macgregor sits is the head of the table] ; 
also, and like the "flimsy card-houses that 
children raise, the present political govern- 
ment of counties, of states — aye, of the city 
on the Potomac itself — will tumble down, 
their places to be taken by the central and 
subordinate administrative organs of the 
nation's industrial forces." — Daniel de Leon. 

The Socialist of the fourth class (the most 
nearly sane of them all) believes in a form of 
government such as the present, but one in 
which "the gist of social and political evolu- 
tion is economic, according to the Socialist 
philosophy." — John Spargo. 

In other words, it would not disturb the 
very small proprietor, or those working under 
co-operation, but would take over the largest 
utilities. 

["J 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The Socialist of the fifth class is in full 
sympathy with Socialism as a political party. 
The real object of his Socialism is to interest 
the Church or Christian element in Socialism. 
He desires to prove that to be a Socialist is to 
be a Christian. 

Here again we have that same uncertain 
note one hears in all, and which seems to me to 
indicate, rather than a practical state of mind, 
a visionary one, showing incompetence of detail. 
For a long time I have been trying to make 
out why these men, seemingly agreeing on 
their main points, cannot get closer together; 
and I have come to the conclusion that it is 
on account of their environments; and, if 
one will take the trouble to associate with 
these men, or read their literature, he may be 
able to see this reason himself. A comedian 
once made a request of his audience: "All 
those of you who think trusts are all right 
hold up your hands." Not a hand went up. 
After a pause, during which he kept looking 

[12] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

over the audience, he finally said: "I know 
why — because you're not in them/' Cannot 
we account for a number of our opinions by 
this homely way of testing them ? 

To be sure, this same question might be 
put to a collection of trust magnates, and, 
on an affirmative answer, the rejoinder be 
made, "I know why — because you're in them." 

Here is what a Socialist writer and lecturer 
has said: 

"Class-division is that which separates 
the 'wage-paying class' from the ' employed 
or wage-receiving class.'" Let us see what 
this last includes: — 

A minister is in a wage-receiving class, so 
he is a laborer; a doctor is in a wage-receiving 
class, so he is a laborer; a lawyer is in a wage- 
receiving class, so he is a laborer; an author 
is in a wage-receiving class, so he is a laborer; 
a labor agitator is in a wage-receiving class 
(how fortunate!), so he is a laborer — but a 
laborer who, with his savings, builds a home, 

[13] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

pays the wages of laboring men, he makes him- 
self a capitalist, for he is in "the employing 
wage-paying class/' as paying the wages to 
the " wage-receiving class." Take a Socialist 
lecturer: — He receives money for his services, 
and is paid by the labor Socialists in the audi- 
ence. What are they, then, but capitalists, 
or of the " employing, wage-paying class?" 
Thus they stand in a dual capacity, or else have 
to perform a sort of gymnastics of before- 
and-after. 

I am using these illustrations only to 
show how delicate is the shade between capi- 
tal and labor; for one must admit that the 
$4,727,403,950.79 in savings banks in this 
country belong to the laborers (if you can put 
your hand on them and separate them from 
the capitalistic class), whatever that may mean. 

There is also $33,818,870 in our Postal 
Savings Bank — a large amount considering 
the time this institution has been in existence. 
This amount, too, belongs to the laborers. 

in] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The total number of depositors in the savings 
banks is 10,766,936. 

There is deposited in other banks #17,482- 
344,275, and a large portion of this, no doubt, 
belongs to the laborers, although there may 
be quite a number who work only with their 
brains. 

I assume that Socialists are not capitalists 
(at least, they would not so admit themselves) ; 
but they are willing by one stride to become 
such; to regulate, manage and control mil- 
lions of dollars, not only the funds in savings 
banks and other banks, but millions of dol- 
lars in manufacturing, railroads, mines, etc. 
Think of it ! Think of the ability necessary for 
such an undertaking! And bear in mind 
where the votes are to come from to get 
political control! The scheme is prepos- 
terous. It cannot be accomplished. If it 
could be, then the laws of nature would be 
reversed. 

"Equality of opportunity with an equitable 

[isl 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

distribution of the product, not necessarily 
equality of wealth, is the aim of Socialism/' 
says William Scholl McClure, on page 24 of 
a paper read before the Albany Press Club. 
This sounds well, and so do "liberty," "equal- 
ity," and "fraternity." There is only one 
word of these three that is generally con- 
strued wrongly, and that is "equality"; but 
the three appeal to every one, because im- 
planted within us is something that calls for 
fair play. We sympathize with "the under 
dog." We sympathize with those who are 
suffering; and if there is a war going on 
we want to see it conducted on what we 
deem fair lines. Thus we sympathize with 
Belgium in this war because the people wanted 
to live peaceably but were not allowed to. 
They were not responsible for the war, yet 
had to suffer for the sins of others. Now 
equality means equal chance to win any 
prize, assuming that x equals y; but God has 
not made us all equal, so how can an unequal 

[16] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

person, even if he has an equal opportunity, 
expect to succeed ? 

The trouble is that we (those of us who are 
strong physically) feel equal. This is a fact 
with possibly a very few exceptions, especially 
in the field of the gathering of wealth, whether 
in money or goods. We dislike to acknowl- 
edge weakness. It is natural to blame others 
for our shortcomings. Many who have no 
commercial ability do not see why they should 
not have the faculty of making money. 
They say, "We could if we had an equal oppor- 
tunity with Mr. , who is an illiterate 

man." But God saw fit not to give us all 
that ability. We do not like to blame God 
for our failings, neither do we like to blame 
heredity, especially psychical — for are we 
not strong, do we not have head, eyes, nose, 
mouth, ears, and body alike? Then we pro- 
test louder than ever, "Give us equality, 
equality, equality." Now, all that the young 
men ask when they line up for a cross-country 

[17] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

run is to stand on a line equal with others in 
the race — an "equality of opportunity." Do 
you doubt that each one expects to win? 
Yet you know that is impossible, for the Al- 
mighty (or, if you like it better, heredity) 
has placed a handicap on some; so the result is 
that the runners come in at different times. 

You say, "Yes, but if all had received the 
same training, equal opportunity, education, 
and wealth, it would have been different." 
Yes, it might have changed a youth from 
fifth to first, but the law still holds good, 
"the survival of the fittest," or, the survival 
of the best ; so it is that we may pull down one 
and build up others, and they will be our 
rulers ; but this law of life cannot be changed. 

We Americans want the best man to win. We 
want fair play. We want each to have an 
opportunity, but we cannot give all equality. 
The thinkers of to-day are striving to this end. 
The intelligence of the people in a democratic 
republic such as we have will not accept any 
[18] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

logic not based on science. I am, of course, 
referring to commercial ability, but " equality" 
holds good in all spheres of life, especially 
those of doctors, lawyers, ministers, authors, 
musicians, and artists. Would it be fair to 
attempt to regulate the compensation of these 
men ? There are plenty of these men who are 
capitalists. All have different ideas as to how 
to live, and live amid different surroundings. 

Of course, I do not mean to convey the 
impression that capitalists are any better 
than other persons, but I do claim that they 
are as good as others, when striving to do 
their duty. The more intelligence one has 
in any calling the less he is concerned as to 
his capacity or importance. You will gen- 
erally find successful persons quiet, unassum- 
ing, and as free from show or ostentation as 
possible. George Washington and Abraham 
Lincoln were men of this stamp. Neither 
would I convey the impression that money 
or property is the most important thing (al- 

[19] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

though very important); for there are any 
number of persons who do not care to be en- 
cumbered with more than their needs call for. 
They dislike to earn it, think it a burden, do 
not understand how business men can take 
such interest in the " humdrum " of trade. 

We may sympathize with the poor, but the 
rich will always be their rulers, not "masters," 
and the poor of to-day may be the rich of 
to-morrow; and "The borrower is servant (not 
' slave') to the lender." 

Equality of opportunity as construed by 
the Socialists means a chance or opportunity 
to show that they are equal or superior to the 
capitalists. Well, to be absolutely fair (ac- 
cording to them), every one should have that 
chance or opportunity, no matter whether 
it may be feasible or absurd. The wealth of 
the United States is about #1,965 per capita; 
and, of course, this is not all cash, but partly 
real estate. Now, what would Samuel Gom- 
pers, president of the American Federation of 

[20] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Labor (who now receives #7,500 per annum), 
do with a #1,965 opportunity, or what would 
any of the railroad engineers (who get #3,500 
per annum), or the Socialist lecturers, editors, 
and writers do? Do you think that, with a 
chance or opportunity of #1,965, they would 
do anything stupendous? What would a 
laboring man (who now receives #640 per 
year) do with a #1,965 chance or opportunity? 
I suppose if either of these men is to have an 
opportunity it would be fair to give even the 
capitalist a chance, for he counts one, and 
would be entitled to #1,965. Whom would 
you wager on coming out ahead? Maybe, 
after a few years, you, my Socialist friend, 
would like to try it all over again. You are 
now having as much of an equality of op- 
portunity as thousands of business men have 
had, or are having. Why do not you suc- 
ceed ? If the Government owned everything 
you would get a job in it. What about your 
equality of opportunity then? Would you 

[21] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

claim a place at the top or at the bottom ? If 
you are an altruist, you would make the other 
fellow take the larger salary! 

Our laws should be of sufficient breadth to 
provide for the education of all our children. 
This is one of the best "equalities of oppor- 
tunity " which our country can offer for future 
success. 



The Stability 
of a Republic rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



TRADES UNIONS 



CHAPTER II 

TRADES UNIONS 

Trades Unions in America are all capital- 
istic in their tendencies. They are a reflex 
of Socialism, although, if you are a union man, 
you will probably say Socialism is a reflex of 
unions. They are, however, very closely 
allied in the basic idea that "the producer of 
wealth ought to get the whole of the wealth 
produced. " That is a self-evident fact. I 
am not going to be led into an assertion of 
who that "producer" really is, for that ques- 
tion has caused much writing and more dis- 
cussion. Whether "ordinary manual labor 
is the sole producer of wealth/' or "all forms 
of living industrial effort, from those of a 
Watt or an Edison down to those of a man 
who tars a fence, should be grouped together 

[2Sl 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

under the common name of laborers/' matters 
not to me just now, but the Socialists and 
labor unions ought to have a common cause. 
Such, however, is not the fact. Here is what 
a union miner and a Socialist, or Social 
Democrat, has to say about John Mitchell, 
President of the United Mine Workers of 
America (I assume that this man is a Social- 
ist and a union man, and, therefore, he is in a 
dual capacity) : 

"Mr. President and Fellow Delegates, I 
have come to speak to you as a Colorado 
miner — one of the rank and file — who has 
grown up among the coal and metalliferous 
mines of the West ; one who knows the history 
of our struggles, our trials, our suffering and 
our bitter defeat, and the grievous wrong 
John Mitchell has done us, and I am here to 
tell you of it." — "John Mitchell Exposed/ 9 
by Robert Randell. 

Also: 

"In Harper's Weekly of December 31, 1904, 
[26] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

is a full-page picture of the banquet given by 
the Civic Federation at the Park Avenue 
Hotel, New York. The discerning eye gazing 
upon the picture of that sumptuous feast 
may be able to discover the countenance of 
Marcus M. Marks, who will be long remem- 
bered for his fight against the Garment 
Workers' Union; O. M. Eidlitz, ditto, New 
York Building Trades ; George A. Fuller of Sam 
Parks infamy, ditto, bridge and structural 
iron workers; Secretary Easley, who sacrifices 
himself to ' maintain friendly relations be- 
tween capital and labor, for $10,000 a year'; 
August Belmont, the newly elected president; 
H. H. Vreeland, the newly elected chairman 
of the welfare department (H. H. Vreeland, 
with union-smashing record) ; Frank Robbins, 
the newly elected chairman of the trade agree- 
ment committee (Frank Robbins, who told 
the miners in the joint-scale committee in 
Indianapolis one short year ago that if his 
union miners struck he had enough non-union 

[27] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

men to fill his contracts — Frank Robbins, who 
gave John Mitchell the 'diamond mementoes' ; 
and President Eliot, of Harvard University, 
who thrice publicly declared 'a scab is a hero/ 
and was denounced by resolution adopted at 
the New Orleans Convention of the American 
Federation of Labor, newly elected, 'on 
motion of Gompers/ chairman of the depart- 
ment of industrial economics. Andrew Car- 
negie sent a long letter saying he was unwell — 
probably worrying over the strikes at his 
mills in Youngstown and Girard, Ohio, against 
a reduction in wages. 

"No wonder John Mitchell is a little sensi- 
tive when the Civic Federation is discussed. 
No wonder his wrath gets the better of his 
judgment when the mask of hypocrisy is 
pulled from the Civic Federation, and his 
treason to the coal miners of America is ex- 
posed. " — Idem. 

Here is what another union miner said at 
that time : 

[28] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"In regard to John Mitchell, I denounce 
him as one of the greatest autocrats I have 
ever seen, and the time is coming when we will 
have to turn him down or he will turn us 
down. Many of our women and children 
have had to wear gunnysacks on their feet, 
and there is much poverty in our camps. 
If Mitchell was doing his duty he would be 
here leading the strike instead of being in 
France, staying at a #i2-a-day hotel, while 
the miners of this district are starving. But 
away back yonder in the East is a man who 
is putting his thumb on you. I have not 
seen the time since the strike was first inau- 
gurated when we could win out any better 
than we could now if we had the money. If 
we were to win this strike it would be turning 
down our idol. Some of the Eastern people 
don't want him turned down." — John Mit- 
chell Exposed" by Robert RandelL 

"The old unionism is organized upon the 
basis of the identity of the interests of the 

[29] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

capitalists and working classes. It spends its 
time and energy trying to harmonize these 
two essentially antagonistic classes; and so 
this unionism has at its head a harmonizing 
board called the Civic Federation. This 
federation consists of three parts: a part 
representing the class, and still another part 
that is said to represent the public. The 
capitalists are represented by that great union 
labor champion, August Belmont. [Laughter 
and hisses.] The working class is represented 
by Samuel Gompers, the president of the 
American Federation of Labor — [hisses and 
cries of sick 'em] — and the public, by the Presi- 
dent. " [Laughter.] — "Industrial Unionism" 
by Eugene V. Debs. 

In Proceedings of the New Jersey Social- 
ists' Unity Conference, that held six sessions, 
beginning December 17, 1905, and ending 
March 4, 1906, you will note the following: 

"It did not take the Conference long to be 

[30] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

one as to the essential reasons for the present 
deplorable division; consequently, it was no 
difficult matter to ultimately agree upon the 
essentials for the solid foundation of a united 
political Socialist movement. 

"We found that this foundation rested upon 
two points — first, the proper attitude for a 
political party of Socialism to assume toward 
the burning question of trades unionism; 
second, the proper attitude for a political 
party of Socialism to assume toward the 
ownership of its press, the voice of the move- 
ment. 

"As to the first, the Conference holds (as 
the subjoined resolutions i, n, and in, 
set forth in detail) that, unless the political 
movement is backed by a class consciousness, 
that is, a properly constructed economic 
organization, ready to take and hold and con- 
duct the productive powers of the land, and 
thereby ready and able to enforce, if need be, 
the fiat of the Socialist ballot of the working 

[31] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

class — that WITHOUT such a body in ex- 
istence, the Socialist political movement will 
be but a flash in the pan — successful, at best, 
in affording political preferment to scheming 
intellectuals, and thereby powerful only to 
attract such elements. On this specific head 
the Conference moreover holds that a political 
party of Socialism which marches to the polls 
unarmed by such a properly constructed 
economic organization but invites a catas- 
trophe over the land in the measure that it 
strains for political success, and in the meas- 
ure that it achieves it. It must be an obvious 
fact to all serious observers of the times 
that the day of the political success of such a 
party in America would be the day of its de- 
feat, to be immediately followed by an indus- 
trial and financial crisis, from which none 
would suffer more than the working class it- 
self. 

"The Conference holds that for the Social- 
ist political movement to favor American 

[32] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Federation of Labor craft unionism is to 
bluntly deny Socialist principles and aims; 
for no matter how vigorously the American 
Federation of Labor may cry 'Organize! Or- 
ganize!!' in practice it seeks to keep the unor- 
ganized, the overwhelming majority of the 
working class, out of the organization. The 
facts can easily be proved to a candid world. 
High initiation fees, limitation of appren- 
tices, cornering of jobs for the few whom they 
admit into the organization, are but a few 
of the methods used to discourage organiza- 
tion, which results not only in lack of organi- 
zation, but by the craft form of what organi- 
zation they do have they isolate the workers 
into groups, which, left to fight for themselves 
in time of conflict, become the easy prey of 
the capitalists. On the other hand, the readi- 
ness with which certain portions of the ex- 
ploiting class force their victims to join the 
American Federation of Labor is sufficient 
condemnation of the organization. 

[33] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"By its own declarations and acts, the 
American Federation of Labor shows that it 
accepts wage-slavery as a finality; and, hold- 
ing that there is identity of interest between 
employer and employee, the American Fed- 
eration of Labor follows it out by gladly ac- 
cepting the vice-presidency of the Belmont 
Civic Federation for its president, Gompers, 
thus allying itself with an organization fa- 
thered by the capitalist class for the purpose 
of blurring the class struggle, and for prolong- 
ing the present system which is cornered upon 
the exploitation of labor. 

"For these reasons the Conference con- 
cludes that it is the duty of a political party 
of Socialism to promote the organization of a 
properly constructed union, both by elucidat- 
ing the virtues of such a union and by expos- 
ing the vices of craft unionism. Consequently, 
and as a closing conclusion on this head, it 
rejects as impracticable, vicious, and pro- 
ductive only of corruption, the theory of 

[34] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

neutrality on the economic field. The Con- 
ference, true to these views, condemns the 
American Federation of Labor as an obstacle 
to the emancipation of the working class. 

" Holding that political power flows from 
and is a result of economic power, and that the 
capitalist is entrenched in the government 
as the result of his industrial power, the Con- 
ference commends as useful to the emanci- 
pation of the working class the Industrial 
Workers of the World, which instead of run- 
ning away from the class struggle bases itself 
squarely upon it, and boldly and correctly 
sets out the Socialist principle 'that the work- 
ing class and the employing class have noth- 
ing in common' and that 'the working class 
must come together on the political as well 
as on the industrial field, to take and hold 
that which they produce by their labor." 

Here you see a gulf fixed, and it reveals the 
egotist well developed. Now I submit the 
[35] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

question, whither are we drifting? — toward 
the ideal, or toward the barbaric? I think 
the Socialists take the correct stand when they 
say that trades unions are capitalistic, and 
that, therefore, with them they cannot unite. 
I am now speaking in a synthetic sense, for 
it is very difficult to say just where "capital" 
leaves off and "labor" begins; but the affilia- 
tion of local, state, and national trades unions 
with the American Federation of Labor as 
advocating the advancement of wages, the 
shortening of hours and the influencing of 
legislation in favor of labor, has produced a 
stronger and more far-reaching trust than 
any as yet organized. They not only use 
their great power to influence legislation, but 
they ask the Government to help them, as 
reported by the Associated Press as follows: 

"Philadelphia, Pa., November 1 8th. — The 
American Federation of Labor to-day unani- 
mously adopted a resolution calling upon 
President Wilson to insist that the Colorado 

[363 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

coal operators immediately comply with the 
federal plan of settlement of the strike in 
that State, and in the event they refuse, that 
he take such steps as are necessary to have a 
receiver appointed for the purpose of taking 
over the mines affected and operating them 
in the interests of the people, under federal 
supervision, until such time as the civil and 
political rights of the people are established. 

"The convention also adopted a resolution, 
raising the salary of the president of the Fed- 
eration from #5,000 to #7,500 a year, and that 
of the secretary from #4,000 to #5,000. 

"In connection with the approval by the 
committee on the executive council's action 
in supporting the immigration bill before 
Congress, containing the literacy test, the com- 
mittee submitted a statement to the conven- 
tion, saying in part : 

"'Your committee desires to call your at- 
tention to and impress upon you the almost 
assured certainty that the cessation of the 

[37] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

present war in Europe will be followed by such 
a flood of migration from those military- 
dominated countries as the world never wit- 
nessed in the change of a people from one home 
to another. 

"'Therefore, it is the duty of the workers 
of America to see to it that they be protected 
in every possible way, to the end that they will 
not be forced into competition with these bits of 
wreckage tossed on our shores or left stranded 
in Europe when the wave of war recedes/ ' 

In the last paragraph, you will notice, they 
would bar their fellow-workmen from partici- 
pating in the glory of a land to which a large 
number of them have recently come. This 
labor trust has its limit, for it has already set 
up a kind of kingdom. The president of the 
American Federation of Labor and the presi- 
dents of other amalgamations have been in 
office for a number of years. This method 
tends to set up a bureaucracy. This labor 
trust has its limit, because the consumers — 

[38] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

those not in the trust — will soon come to 
realize that the advance of labor increases 
the cost of living, without any chance of a 
similar advance for them — say farmers, pro- 
fessional men, doctors, ministers, editors, 
authors, those on salaries, and the very large 
class of those not in unions; for if the em- 
ployer of labor is compelled to pay more 
wages he adds it to the price of the articles 
manufactured. Do you not see that if the 
labor unions advance their scale of wages 
10 per cent., then to be perfectly fair to you, 
if engaged in producing (I use this in its 
larger sense) anything, they should assure 
you a similar advance of 10 per cent.; but 
then, again, if all were advanced ioper cent., 
all would be in the same position as before 
the advance, for the cost of living would simi- 
larly advance. In Australia, from 1901 to 
191 2, wages advanced less than 25 per cent., 
and the cost of living advanced more than 25 
per cent. 

[39] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Here is another report of the Associated 
Press: 

"Chicago, 111., January 18, 1915. — On the 
Western railroads there is a maximum wage 
of $3,725.20 for passenger engineers, and 
$3,342.30 for freight engineers; $1,752.20 for 
passenger firemen, and $1,890.32 for freight 
firemen. Against these maximums, the gov- 
ernors of seven States receive $3,000 a year 
or less, while those of seven other States 
receive $4,000, or only slightly above the 
engineers' maximum earnings. Engineers in 
passenger service earned actually an average 
of $185 per month, with the maximum actual 
earnings of $341. In the freight service the 
average was $170, with an actual maximum 
of $358. The firemen in passenger service 
that month earned an average of $115, with 
a maximum of $210, while in freight service 
their actual earnings for the month were 
on the average of $110, with a maximum of 
$221. Other firemen in combination freight 

[40] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

and passenger service earned even higher 
wages." 

So you see that the labor unions are in a 
class by themselves. They are, in this sense, 
capitalistic. 

The things that have been said about 
Samuel Gompers and John Mitchell by the 
Socialists would fill a big book. It is not my 
desire to stir up hard feelings. I do not ap- 
prove of these attacks. My purpose in no- 
ticing them is to show the feeling between the 
Socialists and the trade unions. I am quite 
sure the critics injure themselves more than 
they do those criticised. 

Just a word about Australia and New 
Zealand. Next to New Zealand, Australia 
leads the world in socialistic government. 
That country is about the size of the United 
States, but we have twenty times its popu- 
lation, if one excludes the aborigines. The 
government owns the railroads, telegraph 
and telephone lines, lighting and water plants, 

[41] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

some of the mines and banks, all the sleeping 
cars and railroad eating-houses; it engages in 
life insurance, regulates the price paid and 
received for labor, etc. 

If we are to believe the Socialists, certainly 
Australia should be happy. Far from it. There 
are twenty times (I conjecture, but so it seems 
to me) more strikes there than in the United 
States. Almost everything is unionized, but 
there are plenty of non-union men, which seems 
strange. Hatred, discontent, and jealousy are 
there, even as in the United States. An at- 
tempt is made to place the energetic, thought- 
ful, and frugal citizen on a par with the 
profligate, idle, and shiftless, who are always 
willing to take advantage of their superiors. 
The income tax, land tax, the license tax, stamp 
tax, etc., are increasing. Incomes above 
#1,000 are taxed. The same defiance of law 
is shown there as appeared here some time ago, 

I cannot go further on this line, for space 
will not permit. But I wish to draw atten- 

[42] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

tion to what I think is an important fact. 
Where hate is, peace will not come, and the 
more hate we have anywhere the less peace 
do we find. Where ignorance gets place 
above intelligence, that country will surely 
retrograde. The only thing that is holding 
Australia together is the attraction of its 
fertile plains. Nature has done much for 
her. But for this favor her Utopian dream 
would have been shattered long ago, as others 
have been on account of the lack of material 
to sustain them. When are we to have men 
who will lead us — show to us our weaknesses, 
impress upon us what life should be, and com- 
pel us, by their logic and their lives, to love 
our fellowmen? When that time has come, 
then peace also will have arrived. 

I will not attempt any historical notice of 
Socialism in England, Germany, France, 
Switzerland, Russia, Canada, etc., or attempt 
any analysis of the theories of men like Robert 

[43] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Owen, Ricardo, Marx, Lasalle, Bebel, St. 
Simon, Upton Sinclair, J. Guesde, or others; 
or special brands of Socialism such as Chris- 
tian Socialism, Democratic Socialism, So- 
cialists of the Chair, Social Monarchical 
unions, Independent Socialists, etc. My main 
purpose is to throw some light on Socialism 
in this country, as well as to endeavor to 
establish more of a brotherly than a merely 
comrade spirit, — for that has a profounder 
appeal. Besides, a book of this character 
could not cover such an extensive ground. 



The Stability 
of a Republic Rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



SLAVERY 



CHAPTER III 



slavery" 



A slave is a "person who is held in bond- 
age to another; one who is wholly subject to 
the will of another; one who is held as a chat- 
tel; one who has no freedom of action, but 
whose person and services are wholly under 
the control of another." (Webster.) Here 
is what a Socialist has to say about a "wage- 
slave" (not a slave according to Webster): 

"While we, the revolutionists, seek the 
emancipation of the working class, and the 
abolition of all exploitation, super-populism 
seeks to rivet the chains of wage-slavery more 
firmly upon the proletariat. There is no ex- 
ploiter like the middle-class exploiter. Car- 
negie may fleece his workers — he has 20,000 
of them — of only fifty cents a day and yet 

[47] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

net, from sunrise to sunset, #10,000 profits. 
The banker with plenty of money to lend can 
thrive with a trifling shaving off each in- 
dividual note at 5 per cent.; but the apple 
woman on the street corner must make a 
105 per cent, profit, even to exist. For the 
same reason, the middle class, the employer 
of few hands, is the worst, the bitterest, the 
most inveterate, the most relentless exploiter 
of the wage-slave." — "Reform and Revolution" 
by Daniel De Leon, pp.12 and 13. 

If any may care to apply the word "slave" 
to themselves, they can do so, and probably 
prove its fitness. The capitalist is a slave 
to his environment ; he must oversee the busi- 
ness he has invested in every day of the year. 
We have all heard the expression, "He is a 
slave to his business." Well does he know 
that, if he should suspend operations, the 
fixed charges of his business would swallow 
him up forthwith. He is a "slave" to those 
depending on him — no matter whether you 

[48] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

may think this extravagant or not. He has 
been gradually environed by a state of affairs 
from which he cannot easily disengage him- 
self. He not only puts in his time at the 
office but he takes his work home with him. 
Many a sleepless night he spends planning, 
possibly for greater success, or for a way to 
avoid disaster. He is a "slave" to his body; 
for he has worked his brain (at meals or too soon 
after) to such an extent that he must needs 
consult his doctor and place himself on a diet. 
If he is a person of much influence, he is called 
on to assist in municipal affairs and various 
other functions, which make him a slave to the 
community; and this deeply saps his vitality. 

You will, my Socialistic reader, probably 
say, "Yes, but he is not a slave. He can go 
and come at pleasure, under certain condi- 
tions." But he cannot, any more than can 
the lowest laborer. He is held in a conven- 
tional grip. He abuses his body more than 
does the laboring man. The suffering of 

[49] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

hunger cannot be compared to the slow sap- 
ping of one's personal force. Hunger is gen- 
erally but occasional; the steady wear and 
tear on the capitalist's nerve mean a slow 
death. Just permit yourself a moment's 
reflection upon the financial wrecks you have 
heard of and read about. You may retort 
"What for?" Oh, very well. But every one 
of us has different kinds of corpuscles in his 
blood. We spring from different people. 
As Luther Burbank sifts a little of the pollen 
of one flower onto the pistil of another, to 
change the character of that plant, so has 
our blood been treated. Race horses have a 
way of expressing themselves different from 
that of draft horses. 

Well, then, why do not the capitalists give 
up their wealth, and retire into the manual 
laboring class ? Did you ever see or hear of any 
one who was not always making an effort to ad- 
vance himself financially, or in some other way ? 
Discontent is "born and bred in the bone." 
[So] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The Socialists make a great mistake when 
they attempt to stir up hatred by stating that 
the laborers are slaves to their masters, the 
capitalistic class — for slavery forestalls that 
sense of human dignity which lies at the foun- 
dation of morals. I submit to you, my Social- 
istic reader, do you not see that you are de- 
moralizing those whom you are attempting 
to help, by stirring up war in their breasts ? I 
have it on good authority that 90 per cent, 
of the wars have been destructive and detri- 
mental, while only 10 per cent, have been of 
service. I know you do not believe in war, 
so why stir it up? Why not rather say to 
laborers, "You are the masters, and just as 
soon as you can show yourselves capable 
you will rule — for you outnumber the capital- 
ists, and you can persuade others to think 
in your own way." In any way and every 
way you should show them the dignity of 
labor, and hold out to them the coming of a 
better day — for it will surely come, and has 

[51] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

come more manifestly in other countries than 
in our own. By doing this, you will render a 
great service to your country — for, unless 
this country is to go backwards, we, all of us, 
must see to it that wealth is distributed as 
widely as possible by proper laws, by cool 
judgment, by intelligence, and the best re- 
gard for the feelings of all, haughty or humble. 
A wise man, whether rich or poor, does 
understand that wealth encourages luxury, 
degeneration, and vice, and that the more of 
simple domestic virtues the people of a nation 
have, the greater and the more potential 
will productive labor be. It sometimes seems 
strange to me that we have not learned this 
lesson from the history of Rome. 



The Stability 
of a Republic rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



HATE 



CHAPTER IV 

HATE 

"Whosoever hateth his brother is a 
murderer." This was said a great many 
years ago. One feels that the Author of that 
phrase was greatly, divinely in earnest. Hate 
has had its sway, and war and strife, but love 
has accomplished much more for the human 
race, and will go on increasing its measure in 
the future. The greatest spirit in history, 
born two thousand years ago, taught that 
Love was the supreme power. Even our 
Anarchists, Socialists, and Labor Union citi- 
zens deplore war, which engenders hatred. 
It depends, of course, on the kind of war. We 
are certainly a queer lot; some of us talk of 
comradeship and brotherly love, and almost 
in the same breath condemn, yea, hate com- 

[55] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

rade and brother, or the other fellow's com- 
rade or brother. Here is the way one kind 
of Socialist feels : — 

"Leave the waving of Union Jacks and the 
singing of silly songs to the brainless, insipid 
Johnnies of the purple-sock brigade, who dive 
under, over, across, and along drapers' and 
grocers' counters for barely sufficient to keep 
them in hair-oil, which, by the way, is their 
share in this great and glorious Empire. 

"When the hand-rags of the capitalist 
class, whether they be journalists, politicians, 
priests, or parsons, call for men to defend the 
interests of the well-fed, widow-robbing, child- 
murdering, brain-clogged, soul-destroying, 
labor-exploiting, psalm-singing, hypocritical, 
double-eyed, blood-sucking fraternity of mod- 
ern Dick Turpins, who buy us working men in 
the labor market in the same way as they buy 
horse-hair, pig-iron, cheese, ham, or any other 
commodity, tell them to go to hell ! 

"If we must organize to fight — and assur- 

[56] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

edly we must — let us organize to fight the 
enemy at home. Let our army be built up 
with its political and industrial battalions. 
Let us engage in the CLASS WAR, the war 
between the skinners and the skinned. 

"War with all its atrocious horrors would 
be impossible if the working class would re- 
fuse to be made hand-rags of." 

Is there much love in that fellow's "cos- 
mos"? 

Here is another kind : 

"If their (the Socialists') contention is cor- 
rect, a small body of capitalists are robbing the 
great working class. If the working class 
has not found out who is robbing it, it cannot 
find out too soon. Nor can the working class 
find out too quickly the methods by which it 
is being robbed. 

" They do not try to array men against 
men. They do not try to engender hatred 
of Mr. Morgan, Mr. Rockefeller, or any other 

[57] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

great capitalist. Socialists have nothing 
against any rich man individually. 

"We mince no words. We say to the capi- 
talist class: 

"'Your pockets are filled with gold, but 
your hands are covered with blood. You 
kill men to get money. You don't kill them 
yourselves. As a class, you are too careful 
of your sleek bodies. You might be killed 
if you were less careful. But you cause other 
men to kill/ 

"'You do it in the meanest way. You do 
it by appealing to their patriotism/ 

"'You say: "It is sweet to die for one's 
country/ 5 ' 

"'You don't dare say: "It is sweet to die 
for Havemeyer," as many Americans died 
during the Sugar Trust war to "free Cuba/' ' 

'"You don't say: "It is sweet to die for 
Guggenheim or Morgan," as many Ameri- 
cans would have died if Taft's army had 
crossed the Rio Grande/ 
[58] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"'You don't say: "It is sweet to die for 
the Tobacco and other trusts," as many 
Americans died during the war with the 
Philippines/ 

"'You don't dare say any of these things, 
because you know, if you did, you would not 
get a recruit. You know you would be more 
likely to get the boot!'" 

This is more moderate — a little more room 
is left for love, but not a great deal. In this 
connection, let us look at what a "robber" 
is. Robbing, in law, is "the act of stealing; 
specifically, the felonious taking and remov- 
ing of personal property, with an intent to 
deprive the right owner of the same; larceny." 
You might apply this to some men or some 
body of men, and in such a case they can and 
should be punished ; but you cannot apply the 
word "robber" to a capitalist under our 
present laws, any more than you can to the 
lowest paid laboring man, unless you can show 

[59] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

that he has robbed. You may apply the 
words, "selfish/' "mean," "greedy," etc., 
which may well fit ; but if you are honest you 
cannot make such a falsehood a truth. You 
may use the words for the purpose of arousing 
a spirit of hatred in men's breasts, but 
you will then call into action two injurious 
emotions, which must antagonize any perma- 
nent benefit. 

Let us look a little closer at this word 
"robber," which Socialists with few excep- 
tions use. It is a savory word to them; it 
has a broad and general context. In a sen- 
sational way it is applied to men of large 
means, those who, as they say, take too large 
a share of the profits or returns of any business. 
But who is to be the judge of just what income 
one is entitled to? Suppose that the writer 
of the Socialist pamphlet I have referred to 
above could by his ability and education 
make #5,000 per year (I assume he will get 
all he can, same as the capitalist), and he re- 

[60] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

ceives that amount from the public; would he 
call himself a robber, or feel comfortable if any 
one else did? 

Take into consideration the working man 
who is receiving $2 per day, or, say, #600 per 
year. From his viewpoint the workmen 
might call him a robber and say, "Why, I 
need as much to eat as you do; I have a family 
to support even as you have; why should you 
get more than eight times as much as I ?" 

The Socialist would probably reply: "I am 
educated, and I have an idea that I have 
more brains, — and, besides, I know how to get 
it. I am more clever." 

But the laboring man might say: "You 
are a robber! We, the workingmen, do not 
need you. You think you are worth #5,000 
a year, but you are not. You do nothing 
but stir up strife. If it were not that the 
public paid you $5,000 per year, living would 
be cheaper." 

Socialist: "Oh, yes, you do need me, for I 

[61] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

will be the means of getting your wages ad- 
vanced, your hours made shorter; in fact, 
before I get through, you'll think you're in 
heaven." 

Laboring Man: "Will you give up some 
of your salary for the general good ?" 

Socialist: "Oh, no! I am looking to those 
who make more than I do, for I expect to add 
something to my salary." 

Laboring Man: "Why not give me #400 
of your salary? Then you will have #4,600 
left, and I will have #1,000 per year. You 
don't know how much that means to me." 

Socialist: "Why, really, I can't do that. 
You see, to tell the truth, it is all I can do to 
make ends meet. I moved into a better 
house, which was larger than our old one, 
and wife had to have a woman come in once 
a week to clean; and, residing in a better 
neighborhood, my wife and children have to 
dress better. I am sending the children to 
school. So you see, I really cannot." 

[62] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Laboring Man: "Well, you see how I'm 
fixed. I would like to do as you are doing, 
but cannot. But say, there's a fellow that 
lives next to me. Can you help him to get 
a job, or maybe can you send him a couple 
of hundred to tide him over until he can get 
one?" 

Socialist: "Well, now, really I can't do 
that either; but I will write and write, and talk 
and talk. I will abuse and abuse the capital- 
ists who have more than I have; will call them 
'robbers' and any other names I can find that 
hurt, and so you will be helped. I am doing 
all this to stir up the laboring men to hate the 
capitalists, and lead them to join the Socialist 
Party. This is what I mean when I say I 
will help you." 

Laboring Man: "/ dont believe it. You 
are taking property against my will. You 
know my wage is all I receive. The money 
you get, while you may not realize the fact, 
comes from me or my fellow-workmen. We 

[6 3 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

pay it; and, if we did not spend our money in 
such foolish ways, you might be a producer 
ofwealth. ,, 

Socialist: "Why, my comrade, you don't 
look at this in the right way. You are all 
wrong. I am really a laboring man, although 
I do not work with my hands. " 

Laboring Man : " Don't call me ' comrade ! ' 
I am no comrade of yours, since you refuse 
to give me #400 of your salary, and also refuse 
to help my comrade until he can get a job. 
You are a coward, snake, capitalist, autocrat, 
aristocrat, well-fed, brain-clogged hypocrite. 
You are a bourgeois, or you would be, and 
some day may be. If I could find fiercer 
words I would use them. Good-bye!" 

I have used the sum of #5,000, because the 
same pamphlet referred to argues: "Socialists 
contend that under Socialism everybody could 
not only have work all the time, but every- 
body could live as well as does now the man 
whose income is #5,000 a year." 

[64] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Of course this refers to only a certain class 
of agitators. 

The following Scripture is to me the most 
beautiful of all literature: 

"If I speak with the tongues of men and of 
angels, but have not love, I am become sound- 
ing brass or a clanging cymbal. And if I have 
the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries 
and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so 
as to remove mountains, but have not love, 
I am nothing. And if I bestow all my goods 
to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be 
burned, but have not love, it profiteth me 
nothing. Love suffereth long, and is kind; 
love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, 
is not puffed up; doth not behave itself un- 
seemly, seeketh not its own; is not provoked, 
taking not account of evil; rejoiceth not in un- 
righteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth; 
beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth 
all things, endureth all things. Love never 
[6 5 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

faileth; but whether there be prophecies, they 
shall be done away; whether there be tongues, 
they shall cease ; whether there be knowledge, 
it shall be done away. For we know in part, 
and we prophesy in part ; but when that which 
is perfect is come, that which is in part shall 
be done away. When I was a child, I spake 
as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a 
child; now that I am become a man, I have 
put away childish things. For now we see in 
a mirror, darkly; but then face to face; now 
I know in part, but then shall I know fully 
even as also I was fully known. But now 
abideth faith, hope, love, these three ; and the 
greatest of these is love." — / Corinthians, 
XIII. 

I have quoted the above in order to show 
the divine contrast between love and hate. 
Who would choose to entertain the latter in 
place of the former? Even the rankest So- 
cialist must, in his serious, better moments, 
see that the one will build up while the other 
[66] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

will tear down. The Socialists have their 
"comrades" whom they love, but part of 
their thought is consumed with hate. Please 
do not classify me as a sentimentalist, for my 
whole life has been passed in dealing with 
hard, practical facts; but I do believe that 
love is the greatest motive power , when it is of 
the practical rather than the sentimental 
kind. Socialists may say that capitalism 
has no love. It is easy to say so; that does 
not make it so. A capitalist's good name is 
of more value to him than his pecuniary 
wealth. 

Socialists dislike the Catholics — a great 
many of them hate them. This is a strong 
word, but I think it conveys the truth. I am 
sorry, for they injure themselves. My sym- 
pathy also goes out to the misguided people 
who are responsible for the anti-Catholic 
literature that is being distributed in this 
country. I said my sympathy \ and that word 
expresses it. I do not hate them, nor greatly 

[67] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

dislike them, but I feel that these people are 
narrow, and are not accomplishing any good, 
while, at the same time, they are promoting 
the very interests which they seek to destroy. 
They permit their baser feelings to overrule 
them. I am sure they have better impulses. 

I am not a professing Catholic, but, when 
I consider the high motives, the zeal, the 
brotherly love, the colossal sacrifices that 
most of these people are capable of, I realize 
in my heart a great respect for them, fori 
feel that they are not narrow, in the sense in 
which that word is generally used, but broadly 
humanitarian. A Catholic priest and I were 
friends in a general cause — a cause of large, 
human well-being. I was not able, in the 
time we were together, to see anything in his 
heart, as judged by his actions, but a broad 
love for humanity; I respected him, and I 
cherish that respect to-day. 



CAPITALISTS 



CHAPTER V 

CAPITALISTS 

It is not my cue to discuss what capital 
is. I will merely say I believe that "to any 
advance in the arts or industries, or the com- 
forts of life, a rate of production exceeding 
the rate of consumption, with consequent 
accumulation of resources, or, in other words, 
the formation of capital, is indispensable. " 
At present we are interested in the capitalist. 
After having read considerably of Socialism 
by different authors, I have not been able 
to define a capitalist. Of course, one can 
pick a few men at the very top and say, 
"These men are capitalists," according to the 
idea of a Socialist; but w r here the bottom is no 
one seems to know. Perhaps my place is 
not with the capitalist class at all; but as our 

[71] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

brothers, the Socialists, say, "the capitalists 
are so much in the minority," I feel like keep- 
ing them company; but "the Lord knows" I 
work hard enough. If one should believe 
all that Socialists say, I think he would come 
to the conclusion that the laboring men (who- 
ever they are) were angels and the capitalists 
were devils. The following is from the pen of 
a learned Socialist author (Karl Kautzky) : 

"The capitalist class performs no manner 
of productive work. This is done by the wage- 
worker, but the wage-worker does not produce 
for himself. He cannot. All the things which 
are to-day indispensable for production — 
land and capital — are the private property 
of a comparatively small number of peo- 
ple. . . . The proletariat (workingmen) 
produce the surplus, which industrial capital 
appropriates." 

Now, my reader, please pick out the capital- 
ist. And how is it that all the Socialists 
know so much about capitalists? Were any 

[72] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

of them ever such ? Have they passed through 
the stress and strain — aye, the very depths 
of despair and anxiety, as these men have? 
They have known, no doubt, what a tired 
brain means, but have they at the same time 
experienced the feeling of disaster, not al- 
ways to one's self, but to thousands of others? 
And yet, as I will take occasion to say later ? 
one Socialist, at least, would run the risk of 
all this if he had the opportunity. 
a "capital" story 
Fifteen years ago I met a gentleman at 
dinner in New York City by the name of 

John . He was forty years of age, 

about five feet eight inches tall, broad-shoul- 
dered, of stocky build, rather light hair, and 
piercing gray eyes overshadowed by heavy 
eyebrows. When he turned those eyes on 
one, especially if he was deeply interested in 
the conversation, one did not think of any- 
thing else. The eyes were as two search- 
lights. The glance was of short duration, 

[73] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

but in that space of time you felt he had pene- 
trated your thoughts. He informed me he 
had spent some time on a farm in his early 
youth, which, no doubt, laid the foundation 
that stood him in such good stead in later 
life. I sat next to him at dinner. He was 
not much of a talker but a good listener. He 
seemed very much interested in what I had 
to say, and was well informed on the general 
topics of the day. He had a peculiar habit 
of tapping on the table with his second finger 
when asked for his opinion. He would draw 
up his shoulders a little, incline his head to 
one side, and tap, tap, tap, for some time 
until one became anxious for him to deliver 
himself. He would weigh his words before 
he spoke. 

This man, we all can agree, was a capitalist, 
or he was certainly one who would fit the 
Socialist's bill He was a hard worker. If he 
had made an engagement to go to the opera, 
had his dress suit on, and it was within a half- 

[74] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

hour of the time to go, and some business 
matter was presented to him that had possi- 
bilities in it, he would break the engagement 
and go to work on the proposition. He was 
not a speculator. He was more interested 
in manufacturing than anything else. 

A year later I met this man downtown 
(he lived in New York City). He invited me 
to his home for dinner and to spend the night. 
I accepted the invitation. We had a most 
delightful time, and soon retired for the night. 
The next morning we breakfasted at eight. 
After we had seated ourselves, a large bundle 
of letters was handed him. He said to the 
butler, "No, take them away. I will not 
look at them now." Then, as if to apologize 
or explain to me, he said, "You see, when I 
am downtown, I am so busy talking to people 
that some of my mail is neglected, so I have 
it sent up here, and at breakfast read it." 

But I said, "Why, how can you survive that ? 
I should think you would have indigestion." 
[7Sl 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Oh, no. My digestion is all right; and 
look at the time I save ; besides, it's quiet here, 
and I can think." 

"Yes, but you are pulling the blood to your 
brain when it should be circling around in the 
region of your stomach. I couldn't stand that 
a week." 

"Well, I can; and, do you know, I think 
the doctors don't know as much as they would 
like one to think they do." 

This ended that part of our conversation. 

After breakfast he said, "Smoke?" 

"No, thanks." 

"Well, think you're sensible. Neither do 
I — not that I don't like it, for I do; but I found 
out, to my satisfaction, that when I smoke, 
I have not as clear a head, so I 'cut it out." 

I have known this gentleman intimately 
ever since, have met him quite often, and I 
regard him as a business friend. The last 
time I saw him was six months ago. He in- 
vited me to his home for dinner, after which 

[76] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

we began a reminiscence. I might say here 
that he is now fifty-five, and has been a suc- 
cessful business man. 

I said, "You have been a very successful 
man. It must make you feel good." 

"Why, no, I've never thought of it in that 
light. I can't tell t you what has impelled me 
to do as I have done, unless it is that I like 
the game. I don't feel any different since 
my working on the farm. I do not under- 
stand when I hear people say, 'He must be a 
great man to do that/ or 'I wish I had his 
brain/ or 'If I had his money I would do so 
and so/ When they smile at me so sweetly, 
and jump up and offer me a chair, it makes 
no impression on me, as I feel just the same 
as I always have." 

"You have, no doubt, seen some hard work 
in the past fifteen years." 

"Hard work? Well, I should say so; if I 
had not a constitution like an ox I should 
have gone down long ago. For days and days 

[77] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

I have worked from eight in the morning until 
midnight, not only for months, but for years ; 
and now the doctors say (blame the doctors !) 
that if I don't 'let up/ they will not be re- 
sponsible. Lately I have been troubled with 
indigestion — can't sleep well, and am more 
nervous. Sometimes I have terrible dreams, 
but — let's drop this sort of talk." 

I said, "You have made a great many im- 
provements in your own business — I mean the 
business you are most largely interested in." 

"Yes, but this could not have been accom- 
plished had I not employed a large force of 
chemists to find use for the by-products. As 
these chemists became more valuable, I raised 
their salaries. Finally, I struck on a plan 
of giving them a percentage on the savings 
their discoveries made possible. Don't know 
how it will work, but I'm going to try it. 
Some of these fellows seem to have good heads, 
while others, try their best, do not get any- 
thing out." 

[78] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Do you give these the same salaries?" 

"Why, bless you, no. Do you think the 
bright ones would stand for that? I asked 
one of them who was a Socialist: 'Charlie, 
you get #5,000 a year. Will you divide up 
with Hank?' (Hank gets #2,000.) He 
quickly said, 'I guess not/ 'Well/ I said, 
'I thought you were a Socialist/ He said, 
'Well, I never looked at it in that light/ I 
said, 'Think about it/" 

"Could Charlie run the business if you 
were to sell it to the Government?" 

"Lord, no! Charlie knows all about the 
business, but he doesn't know a thing about 
handling the workmen to the best advantage. 
He has no idea outside of chemistry. He has 
no ideas of management. The goods he would 
turn out would be more costly than they are 
now, without his salary added." 

"Well, you know the Socialist idea is for 
the Government to run such large establish- 
ments?" 

[79] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Oh, yes, I know, but who is going to be 
the boss, or who is going to place the value on 
the boss ?" 

" I don't know how they are going to fix that." 

"Well, I have been in business a great 
many years, and I never heard a more foolish 
thing. It is not practical. It's visionary. Is 
that what you or I would do in our business — 
turn out our best men and keep the poorest?" 

" I want to go back to Charlie, one of your 
chemists. You know, it is not all of the 
Socialists' idea to divide up. That idea pro- 
vokes them. They say that it is idiocy too 
glaring to need exposure." 

"Oh, yes, I know about that; and of course 
they are right ; but some of them (not many) 
claim that this can be done to a certain extent ; 
but it certainly is foolish. I was just having 
some fun with Charlie, but was surprised to 
see he tumbled to it. Charlie is a very selfish 
fellow, and has bothered me more than the 
rest about advancing his salary." 
[80] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Is Charlie educated? What sort of a 
fellow is he?" 

"Why, Charlie is a well-read man; in fact, 
you can't touch on any subject but he can take 
his part. He is, I think, a Frenchman. At 
least, he can speak that language, besides 
Italian and Spanish." 

"How is it that he doesn't understand more 
about Socialism?" 

"Yes, that is curious, and I, for one, fail to 
see how the Socialists expect to gain many 
followers. For think of the thousands of 
workingmen who cannot read; and the thou- 
sands more whose reading is so limited that 
their reasoning must be quite limited also. I 
don't wish to cast any reflection on the Social- 
ist thinkers, for they have had in their ranks, 
and still have, some of the best in the world ; 
but they talk "over the heads" of their lis- 
teners. And, besides, have you never noticed 
that thinkers, or philosophers, some of them, 
are not very 'practical? I should say Karl 
[81] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Marx was their best prophet; but any ordi- 
nary man can look ahead when he has a hint, 
as, for instance, of the drift of competition 
and trusts. One must have a great deal of 
patience to read Marx's books through. I 
want to tell you, however, that Karl Marx was 
a remarkable man. I admire him probably 
as much as some of the Socialists dislike the 
capitalists. " 

" I quite agree with you that there are some 
remarkable Socialists. " 

"Yes, but they all keep taking one way back 
into ancient history, and tiring one by reiterat- 
ing that social revolution is inevitable and sure 
to come — what private property is, and how 
the laboring man produces everything. They 
will tell you of the size of the socialistic re- 
public, start out on a voyage around the world 
and tell you how Socialism is going to affect 
all countries, — tell you about the economic 
value of the State, show you how Socialism will 
reform the State, how superior Socialism is to 

[82] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Capitalism, tell you the difference between 
the kinds of Socialism, etc. 

"Some Socialists tell you how government 
ownership will not work, and that such owner- 
ship is not Socialism, although thousands of 
other Socialists believe it is. They also know, 
and can see into the capitalist's brain, and 
tell why the capitalists resort to government 
ownership. Strange to say, they will tell you 
about the 'feather-brained' capitalist's idea 
of Socialism, and can show you how to run 
your business better than you can yourself. 
They make fun of every one who differs from 
them, and talk of their logic being much 
superior to that of all others. But the ques- 
tion that provokes them most, I think, is i What 
is your plan?' If you ask them that and 
are not abused then I will be mistaken. They 
will say you are stupid, malicious, and apply a 
lot more of choice adjectives; but how is it 
they tell you exactly how it is going to work, 
not only here, but all over the world, — tell 

[8 3 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

you how it is coming about, and all that sort 
of thing, but when you ask for a plan, then 
they begin to hedge and tell you that you are 
stupid, that you should have 'faith in us/ as 
Moses had in God, saying, 'We will lead you 
out of the wilderness. Trust us/ 

"That is not the way nations are formed. 
That is not the way our republic was launched. 
Our leaders had a plan, and everybody knew 
about it. The principal laws were kept, and 
when they were altered, it was done by a 
majority of the people. When I speak of 
a majority, I do not mean a numerical one, but 
the preponderance of intelligence, for one intel- 
ligent man may influence a thousand." 

"Yes, but you are speaking of only one kind 
of Socialist." 

"I know it. You seem to be asking me all 
che questions. Now, I am going to ask you 
one. How many kinds are there?" 

" Well, that is a question. I knew when you 
asked me one it would be difficult to answer. 

[8 4 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

I had reference to those who believe in the 
government, as it now stands, taking over 
and paying for property with bonds." 

"That rather amuses me, for that is con- 
fiscation, but on a milder scale than advocated 
by the last Socialist I was discussing. You 
see, the more rational these men are the more 
mild they are, and the clearer the ideas they 
put forward ; also the more followers they will 
have. Their propaganda are more practical, 
and people can understand better what they 
really mean ; but they want only the big things 
that are making money — like the business I 
have built up for these twenty years — the 
business I have worked for as I never would 
have done had it been for the government, as 
there would have been very little incentive — 
no fun in the game. And I thoroughly be- 
lieve that the money I have received for my 
efforts is no more than I was entitled to, and 
that it would not have been made under govern- 
ment management. I think, too, I have used 

[85] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the money entrusted to me to better advan- 
tage than the government would have done. 
Some one must, of necessity, invest the sur- 
plus; and cannot the thousands of business 
men who have been trained in their different 
lines do this better than those who have not 
their experience? These men would not be 
in these places if they were not fitted to fill 
them. 

"Do you think the State could or would ex- 
pend the money as wisely? For please bear 
in mind the multitude of affairs this State 
would have to take on its shoulders without 
having as deep an interest in the spending of 
it. Suppose the industries in one State were 
more profitable than those in another. Do 
you think the laboring men in one State would 
be willing to give up some of the ' capital 
they produce/ to another State less prosper- 
ous?" 

"Well, suppose the laboring men of the 
United States Steel Company, including the 
[86] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

office force, were to divide up the profits, how 
would that look to you?" 

For a few moments, I thought he would not 
answer, for he kept tapping, tapping, tapping 
that second finger of his on the table. Then 
he turned those keen eyes on me. "I can an- 
swer you only by taking you into my personal 
affairs. I dislike to do that, but have made 
up my mind to do so, for then it will not be 
based on theory, but on actual occurrence. 

"I am in several businesses, but will take 
two, the elevation of grain, and drygoods. I 
have in each an investment of, elevator, 
$490,000, drygoods, $500,000. Each earns 
$35,000, which is about 7 per cent, on the in- 
vestment. In the elevator I employ ten men, 
while in the drygoods I employ five hundred. 

"Now, on the theory that 'labor produces 
all/ and should take it, and that the capitalist 
is not needed, and that his property should 
be taken from him and given to those who 
made it, how do we now see it here ? Why, my 

[87] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

employees in the elevator would divide up 
$35,000 profit among ten men, which is $3,500 
each, while the men employed in the drygoods 
business would divide up $35,000 profit among 
five hundred, and get $70 each." Then he 
turned and looked at me, saying," Figure it out ." 

I said, "Well, give me a little time." I 
finally advised him that it seemed to me he 
had taken the extremes. 

"No, I think not. Of course, there is a 
shading between these two businesses, but I 
took my business that I know about. I said 
so at the start." 

"Yes, but is there any other business that 
you are familiar with?" 

"Well, yes; I know something about rail- 
roads. This country had $19,752,536,264 
(capital stock $8,622,400,821; funded debt 
$11,130,135,443) invested in the railroads 
in 1912. They employed 1,716,380 persons. 
Those roads made $352,275,162 in twelve 
months ; so, if you should divide it between all 
[88] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the employees, they would receive #205.24 
each. This does not allow anything for the 
stockholders' interests; which amount to 
$8,622,400,821. Some of these stockholders, 
no doubt, are laboring men. Should you 
allow them as low as 3 per cent., you would 
have only $93,603,137 to divide between the 
employees, which would be $58 each; so here 
we have the division each year of: elevator 
employees, $3,500; drygoods employees, $70; 
railroad employees, $58. You see this could 
not be done or there would be trouble. The 
State, or some other authority, would have to 
take all that these people made in the various 
occupations, and divide it up in accordance 
with what they thought just. 

"Now, I am aware that some Socialists 
will call this sort of argument foolish; but, as I 
said before, very many of them do not know 
any better, nor have they any sort of idea as 
to how it is going to work; neither do the most 
intelligent have any plan, nor will they tell 

[89] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

you what they think a good one would be like. 
They virtually say, 'Don't cross the bridge 
before you come to it/ 'We have no definite 
plan/ In a general way, they dream about 
it. If you go to their lectures, you come away 
with a lot of history, most of which is stale, 
and with a heavy load on your heart for the 
suffering of humanity, — all of which the capi- 
talists are held responsible for; and that stigma 
is the object they have in view." 

"I see you are pretty well posted on rail- 
roads. What do you think of the Socialists 5 
idea of government ownership ?" 

"I know you don't believe in government 
ownership. Why do you ask me about it?" 

" Because I believe your opinion is worth 
a great deal to me, and so many differ on this 
point." 

" I know. Well, I think it would be ridicu- 
lous — at least in this country, and likely to 
be for a great many years to come, and maybe 
forever — at least as long as we have control 

[90] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

of the railroads as we have to-day. It is 
somewhat different in older countries, and es- 
pecially in Germany. In Holland they have 
both systems, government ownership and 
private ownership, in order, I believe, that the 
government may have a check. I will give 
you my reasons why I do not believe in gov- 
ernment ownership. 

"Take the eight billion six hundred million 
dollars invested in railroad stocks outstanding 
in this country. Do you not think these 
stockholders are anxious for dividends ? They 
are thinking of them all the time. They can 
criticise the management from the president 
down. The officers feel this, and are aware 
that their salaries depend on the earning power 
of their respective roads. They, in turn, not 
only think about this all day, but sometimes 
take it home with them. If the Government 
owned the railroads, who would the stock- 
holders be ? You and I, all of us. Are most of 
us to-day thinking about the services the Govern- 

[91] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

ment is concerned in now — whether they pay 
or not? — Are we worrying as to whether the 
Parcel Post is making any money, or whether 
a private company could run it cheaper? 
Our municipal affairs, — how are they run ? and 
why are we crying out for commission govern- 
ment ? — No, my friend, it is not human to ex- 
pect the same co-operation from the people 
who have only an indirect interest in anything 
as that which is given by the people having a 
direct interest. What is ' everybody's busi- 
ness is nobody's business' is an old but true 
saying." 

"Yes, but people say the stocks of the rail- 
road are watered." 

"Well, suppose they are. Those who own 
the present stock have paid their good money 
for it, counting on a moderate dividend. But 
suppose this to be so, and that it forms a good 
reason for our country confiscating their 
property. Would it not be wiser for us, out- 
side of the railroads, to legislate one half of 

[92] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

their stock out of existence, and base our 
freight rates on the one half remaining? For 
then we should keep the personal element con- 
nected with the enterprise." 

"But how about other large companies — 
other utilities?" 

"Same thing. Don't forget these words — 
* personal interest/ 'initiative/ 'struggle/ 
'economy'; for these, although not wholly 
absent from the Government, are not very 
active." 

" Don't you think people get a false idea of 
what they would receive if we had a socialistic 
government?" 

"Let me tell you what the facts show at 
the present time. Last year the income (as 
shown by income tax returns) of approxi- 
mately 357,600 people of the United States 
was #4,000,000,000. This came from those re- 
ceiving #3,500 and over per year; or, in 
other words, if the #4,000,000,000 had been 
divided equally, each of the 357,600 would 

[93] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

have received #1,118,568. Now suppose we 
take the 3 57,600 people and grade them all down 
to #3,500 each per year; they would have al- 
together #1,251,600,000, which deducted from 
#4,000,000,000 would leave #2,748,400,000. 
Let us divide this #2,748,400,000 among the 
people of the United States equally. Say there 
are 20,000,000 families (five to the family); 
each family would then get #137.42, or #27.48 
per head per year; so you can add #137.42 (if 
you have a family) to your income, or, if 
single, #27.48, and so can also the 357,600 whom 
we have reduced to #3,500. So, as far as we 
can now see, all this agitation of the Socialists 
is for this #137.42 per family, or #27.48 per head 
per year, which they propose to get by govern- 
ment ownership, or by confiscation. Of 
course, the #2,748,400,000 would not be 
divided equally, but by the ratio, the salary 
or pay received by each ; so, of course, the less 
pay the less the amount they would receive. 
"We cannot make any other deductions 

[94] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

for lack of statistics, and here is where our 
government falls down. Every person in these 
United States should pay an income tax, no 
matter how small his income. Then we 
would have a basis for future comparison. 
For instance, if we knew what the gross in- 
come was from all sources, we might then say 
what would happen if every one received 
#1,000 per year, etc. Suppose we could com- 
pel the 357,600 to accept an income of #3,500 
per year. You may speculate on what would 
happen. If you still feel inclined to speculate, 
suppose all were put on a #1,000 per year 
basis. " 

"Have you made other calculations? If 
you have, I wish you would give me the benefit 
of your thoughts, for I have speculated but 
very little — have not looked at the subject in 
the way you have." 

"Well, if you are really so much interested, 
I may say if we should reduce the above 
357,600 persons from #3,500 per year to #1,500 

[95] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

per year, that would be a reduction of #2,000 
for each; multiplied by 357,600 it would equal 
#715,200,000. Now, let us say that there 
would be 400,000 more people getting on an 
average #2,500 per year. Let us also reduce 
these to #1,500 per year; that would be a 
reduction of #1,000 each; multiplied by 400,000 
people, it would equal #400,000,000. Add 
this to the #715,200,000; it would equal 
#1,115,200,000. Let us now take our 20,000,- 
000 families in the United States as before, and 
divide it among them, and we have #1,1 15,200,- 
000 divided by 20,000,000 families; this equals 
#55-75* which you may add to the former calcu- 
lation in my previous answer to your question, 
which you remember was #137.42 per family, 
and you have a total of, say #137.42 plus #55.75 ; 
equal to #193.17 as a total for each family; so 
that a laborer at the head of a family, who 
receives now #640 per year, would then get 
#193.17 additional, or #833.17 per year, and 
the rich and the others would have #193.17 

[96] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

added to their #1,500, making a total of 
#1,693.17 for them. 

"You asked me 'what would happen if all 
were reduced to #3,500 ? ' Now, I suppose you 
would like to know also how it would be if all 
were reduced to #1,500, or after you have 
added the #193. 17 — making a total of #1,693. 17 
for one class and #833.17 for the other? 

"As you see, we have divided all the profits 
and part of the salaries in the United States, 
and those who have large incomes would have 
to change their mode of living. New York 
City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston, etc., 
would not then be in the condition they are in 
to-day. Of course, this profit would not be 
the same (if any were made). It would be 
widely distributed; but do you speculate; you 
can do it better than I." 

"I should say the extravagance of the many 
would be vastly greater than the extravagance 
of the smaller number, and that if based on eco- 
nomics, it would be a retrograde movement. 

[97] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"One thing would be certain, I think, and 
that is, that there would be no profits to divide 
if the Government ran the business of this 
country !" 

"I wish you would take a look into the 
future. What do you think is going to hap- 
pen? Have you given the subject any special 
thought ?" 

"Yes, I have thought quite a little of what 
Karl Marx has said about a ' Communistic 
Revolution' (our late Socialistic writers say 
Karl Marx was really a Socialist). That will 
never come; or if it should come it will be 
like all the other past revolutions, in the 
sense that it will not eliminate the poor labor- 
ing class. Whatever it is that prevents the 
uplifting of that class, we have not as yet been 
able to discover, or, even if so, to find a rem- 
edy. If by some means one could revolu- 
tionize man's nature, there would be a better 
prospect ; but, just as soon as you touch a man's 
pocketbook or his selfish nature, then there is 

[98] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

trouble. The strong will always dominate 
the weak, not numerically, but intelligently. 
This will be only history repeating itself. In 
some way, and by some means, all men must 
feel for and sympathize with one another 
before a better day may dawn. There must 
be something more than the physical affecting 
the moral. Is it not pitiable to contemplate 
man's blindness and his reaching out for 
light?" 

"Why, do you know what time it is? It is 
half-past eleven/' 

"That so! I must apologize for keeping 
you up so late, but I became so absorbed in 
what I was saying, I did not realize the time. 
We must retire. " 

The next morning he inquired when I was 
coming to New York again. I said I should 
probably be down in about a month. He in- 
vited me to stay over night with him again, 
"for," he said, "you have wound me up and I 
want to run down/' 

[99] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The time rolled around quickly, and I was 
again at his home. (I did not intend to in- 
troduce you to his family, but I do not wish 
to leave the impression that he had none. 
His family consisted of his wife and two boys ; 
of these the elder resembled the mother and 
the younger the father. Their ages were 
thirty-three and thirty. They were in their 
father's service. Both were strong, sturdy, 
active, and intelligent.) 

After dinner we went into the library. I 
at once started the conversation. "I am 
very anxious to hear what you think of the 
eight-hour day/ 5 

He began again tapping with his second 
finger. "You may think it strange, but I 
have the interests of the men in our employ 
on my mind more than you probably would 
think. I can't tell you why, but maybe we 
had better call it a brotherly feeling. The 
Socialists probably would laugh at that, but 
it is the best definition I can give. If they 
[ ioo] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

claim it is selfish, I trust they will consider their 
own selfishness. 

"We tried the eight-hour-a-day proposition, 
and we did not see much difference in the out- 
turn, and the men did not seem to appreciate 
the change; but I think it is a good thing, and 
should be enacted into a law that would cover 
all kinds of employment. It certainly is a 
step in the right direction, for it would give the 
people some time in which to educate them- 
selves in various ways, and would let up 
on the wear and tear of the nerves. The main 
reason for discontinuing it was the competition 
in other States. Men were working there ten 
hours a day. We had on our payroll twelve 
hundred employees, whose average wage was 
#2.50 per day, so that a cut from ten to eight 
hours meant fifty cents per person, which for 
us amounted to #600 per day, or #180,000 per 
year. We couldn't stand it, for we were losing 
money. We kept it up for six months in 
hopes that our competitors would see the jus- 
[ZOI] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

tice of it, and do likewise, but they did not. 
Now, as I said before, I believe in the eight- 
hour-a-day work based on ten hours' pay, but 
a federal law should be enacted instead of a 
State law, for then all engaged in similar occu- 
pations would be on the same basis. I believe 
the older the country becomes, the more we 
shall realize that we have, in certain things, 
outgrown the statehood period, when business 
was conducted on a small scale, and trade was 
carried on within the boundaries of the same 
State in which the individual or company found 
customers. Interstate means a bigger, broader 
field, and therefore a bigger, broader admin- 
istration. Of course, in reducing the hours 
of labor we must take into consideration the 
labor of foreign countries; for now we pay 
much more than they do, and if we cannot pro- 
duce as cheaply on an eight-hour basis we 
shall handicap ourselves when competing for 
foreign trade, and this may shut down some of 
our factories, and by so doing throw a great 
[102] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

many out of employment. It seems very easy 
to talk about paying higher wages, shorter 
hours, etc., but there is a deep, underlying 
economic question that must be taken into 
consideration." 

"I am glad you have tried the eight-hour 
day, and know for certain the results. You 
said something about brotherly feeling. What 
do you mean by that?" 

"Well, I have tried profit-sharing, and that 
didn't work. I was manufacturing under a 
secret process; I paid big wages and put into 
effect the profit-sharing scheme, thinking the 
men would feel more interested in the business. 
I assisted my foreman to buy a home. This* 
is what happened: My son was superintending 
the plant. One day the foreman became very 
much enraged over a trifling matter, and he 
threatened my son in a frightful manner, and 
with very abusive language. I at once in- 
formed the foreman that he must apologize 
or give up his place. He refused to apologize. 

[io 3 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

He was discharged, and all the men, every 
one, walked out. I settled with them and 
paid up their profits. I ascertained later that 
these men went to work at a much lower wage, 
and, of course, lost the profits I was paying 
them. In about a month the foreman came 
to me, saying he was very sorry, and asked to 
be taken back. I reinstated him. That was 
about fifteen years ago, and he is working for 
me still. I did not understand then why these 
men gave up their places, nor do I now. At 
the time it damaged my business and caused 
quite a loss, for I had to break in new men to a 
secret process. " 

"Have you tried to help your men in any 
other way?" 

"Yes, in the elevating of grain. We have 
what are known as scoopers. These are men 
who scoop or shovel the grain in the vessel 
when unloading. These men do not work 
very hard, but their work is very dusty. The 
i boss-scooper' always kept a saloon, where 
[ 104 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the men were supposed to drink. Each week 
their money was paid to the boss, and he de- 
ducted what they owed him for drinks, and 
paid them the balance. At times this balance 
amounted to very little, for the men were in 
the habit of 'treating/ and, of course, drank 
too much as a result of drink being so conveni- 
ent. In the winter their families would suffer 
on account of the little money the scoopers 
had saved from their wages. I noticed this, 
and finally determined to employ a boss who 
did not have a saloon. I did so, and built a 
shanty on the grounds near the elevator, 
placing in it a keg which I ordered filled with 
gruel, well iced. I also furnished cards, domi- 
noes, and other games to play when they were 
waiting for vessels. This kept them from the 
saloon almost entirely. 

"In about a week the former boss-scooper 
came to me and pleaded for the place. I told 
him frankly I had made up my mind not to 
employ a boss-scooper who was a saloon- 

[105] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

keeper, and explained my reasons. He went 
away, but in a few days came back with the 
alderman of the ward, who did the talking. 

He said that had sold his saloon to a 

friend, so would I now give him the place. I 
finally decided not to do so, which seemed to 
provoke the alderman, for it was votes he 
wanted — not the good of the boss-scooper. 
In about a week I received a call from three 
assessors. They talked over the same ground, 
and finally said, 'You had better reinstate the 
boss-scooper/ I was provoked and replied 
that I had made up my mind to keep the 
boss-scooper I had, for he was a sober man, 
and never owned a saloon. That winter I was 
presented with a paper on which were written, 
by women, words of thankfulness for what I 
had done, and stating that they had received 
about all the wages from their husbands, and 
were very happy. These were the wives of 
the scoopers. 

"In all other elevators each had a boss- 
[106] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

scooper who owned a saloon. My experiment 
started a campaign against the saloon boss, 
which was carried on by a Catholic priest, 
whom I learned greatly to respect. He was 
responsible for the rule that no money should 
be paid to the scoopers in saloons; and to-day, 
after many years, the money is paid near the 
elevators, and away from the saloon. This 
Catholic priest gave his time and great effort 
to the cause of humanity without any reward 
that I know of." 

"That is very interesting. The wives must 
have been happy. Do you care to tell me of 
anything else?" 

"I think not. I want to say, however, 
that / am not alone in thoughtfulness for em- 
ployees. I could tell you of almost all my 
friends who are doing what they can, and are 
anxious to hear of any new plan. I will make 
a prediction, and that is that this world will 
become better and more humane, and the 
'capitalists' will assist in bringing it about. I 
[ 107] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

may say my son asked me if he could start a 
welfare work among the employees in one 
of our factories. I said to him, 'Yes, cer- 
tainly/ So you see good works are infec- 
tious/' 

"What kind of welfare work is your son 
doing ?" 

"He is advised of the condition of our work- 
men. We do not offer assistance unless the 
men are anxious for it. I will give you an 
instance. Just before we started this work, 
one of the men slipped on a piece of ice and 
sprained his foot. He continued working 
until he was compelled to go to a doctor. 
This doctor took all of the two hundred dollars 
he had saved. He next went to the General 
Hospital, where he stayed two weeks. He 
received no relief there. Then he had to go to 
work, for his family was in sore distress. At 
this time we had started the welfare work, and 
found this case. Our man suggested osteo- 
pathic treatment. It was really pitiful to 
[108] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

see this strong man walk by the aid of a cane. 
He had been compelled to take a subordinate 
position in our factory on account of his trou- 
ble. This man was taken to the osteopath, 
who told him that he could be cured, but it 
would be necessary to 'breakdown' the foot, 
as one joint was riding on the other. This 
was done, and after a few treatments he threw 
away his cane, and a happier man it were hard 
to find. He says he will never forget the kind- 
ness shown him." 

"That sounds good to me. I hope you may 
be of more service. What do you think of the 
future of this country ? 

"Something unusual is about to happen in 
the next one or two decades. It does not 
take much of a philosopher to foresee that. 
I am enough of an optimist to predict that it 
is going to be well with us. Invention has 
about reached its limits. We navigate under 
water, and travel and soar above our earth; 
there is not much room left for improvement. 
[ 109] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Think of the wonderful inventions during the 
last half century, crowding one on the other 
in such rapid succession. The mind of man is 
not satiated, but ever ready to turn its at- 
tention to other fields. One field is to be the 
brotherhood of man. The forerunner is tem- 
perance, which is advancing not only in this 
country but abroad. Man is always seeking 
the ideal, but most of us do not want to be 
called idealists. We have sought the ideal in 
wars, we have sought it in art, we have 
sought it in religion, we have sought it in 
invention. Now, we are going to seek it in 
goodness, in brotherhood; and, through it all, 
the heart will rejoice and sing for joy. 

"The art of music will increase. It is the 
art that has the greatest power next to love, 
the mightiest of all. It is the art that does not 
satiate the soul, but is always sweet, pure, and 
fresh; the art that is never old, but always 
new; the art that lives in all nations and is 
not the respecter of tongues; the art that can- 
[no] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

not live with hate, but is at its best with 
love." 

THE BIG MEN 

The big men dare, and the big men do. 

They dream great dreams, which they make come true: 

They bridge the rivers and link the plains, 

And gird the land with their railway trains; 

They make the desert break forth in bloom, 

They send the cataract through a flume 

To turn the wheels of a thousand mills, 

And bring the coin to a nation's tills. 

The big men work, and the big men plan, 

And, helping themselves, help their fellowman. 

And the cheap men yelp at their carriage wheels, 

As the small dogs bark at the big dogs' heels. 

The big men sow while the cheap men sleep, 

And when they go to their fields to reap, 

The cheap men cry, "We must have a share 

Of all the grain that they harvest there! 

These men are pirates who sow and reap, 

And plan and build while we are asleep! 

We'll legislate till they lose their hair! 

We'll pass new laws that will strip them bare! 

We'll tax them right and we'll tax them left, 

Till of their plunder they are bereft; 

We'll show these men that we all despise 

Their skill, their courage, and enterprise !" 

[in] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

So the small men yap at the big men's heels, 
The fake reformer with uplift spiels; 
The four-eyed dreamers with theories fine, 
Which bring them maybe three cents a line; 
The tin-horn grafters who always yearn 
To collar coin that they do not earn. 
And the big men sigh as they go their way: 
"They'll balk at the whole blamed thing some day!" 

— Walt Mason. 



The Stability 
of a Republic Rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters. 



THE FARMER 



CHAPTER VI 

THE FARMER 

In the year 1907 two Norwegians came to 
this country. They had read and were told 
of the Utopia, "the land that flows with milk 
and honey," a land where fortunes could be 
picked up by everybody. For a year they 
had thought the whole thing over, and finally 
concluded to take a chance. The names of 
the two Norwegians were Einar Malstad and 
Ole Binder. They were alike as two peas. 
They were rather short, stocky, "well put 
up," light hair and light complexion. Both of 
one age — thirty-six years old. It seems rather 
strange that both families were composed of 
two girls and two boys of about the same ages. 
The wives were not so nearly alike as their 
husbands, but both had the light hair and 

[us] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

complexion. They were of a cheerful, happy, 
sunny disposition. At times they worked in 
the field with the family, besides taking charge 
of their own household affairs. 

Finally, the long-looked-for day for their 
departure arrived. Gathering up their light 
possessions in sacks, or tying them in a ticking 
by bringing the four corners together, sending 
some of their household goods by freight, 
bidding their friends a last good-bye, they 
sailed from Hamburg for America. 

The habits of these two men were some- 
what different. Einar was very fond of 
reading. Both could read and speak English 
fairly well, but Ole did not have a taste for 
reading. He was very fond of his pipe, and 
was very happy when in companionship of his 
kind — a social, good-hearted, good-natured 
fellow. Einar did not care to smoke, but was 
good-natured, fond of companionship, and 
was always ready for an argument. During 
the voyage they had plenty of time to occupy 
[116] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

themselves as best suited their tastes. While 
Ole was having a good time smoking, Einar 
was searching for literature about America, of 
which there was a liberal supply. At times he 
would enter into an argument as to the best 
sort of grain adapted to the new country, what 
quantity to sow to the acre, the best feed for 
the cattle, and how to construct the best and 
cheapest shelter for them. He would sit by 
Ole and tell him what he had read, which had 
the effect of stimulating Ole to read for a time, 
but it was spasmodic. 

One day, after the noon meal, when they 
were sitting alone, the sun was sending its 
cheerful rays on the deck; Ole had just lit his 
pipe. He said to Einar, "Why don't you 
smoke? My, you don't know what pleasure 
you're missing !" 

"Yes, I know what you mean, for I have 
passed through the same experience, but I 
found, by carefully watching myself, that when 
I did not smoke, I felt less tired after work; 

[117] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

that when I had to hurry all day to get my hay 
in, working hard until I couldn't see, the next 
day I seemed as good as ever." 

"Oh, nonsense! That's your imagination. 
I, too, have worked as you say you have, and 
felt, the next morning, as fresh as a colt." 

"Well, Fm not going to argue on a subject 
where I know neither of us can convince the 
other, but one thing I do know — my pocket- 
book feels better." 

The voyage soon came to an end, and after 
passing quarantine they landed in New York. 
They had some very exciting times in New 
York, but it would be taking up too much 
space to relate them here. It is sufficient to 
say that on account of the reading Einar did 
on shipboard the party came through the 
ordeal in good shape and not with an undue 
expenditure of money. After purchasing their 
tickets for Minneapolis, they started on their 
long journey. In two days and nights they 
arrived. From here they went to Grand 
[118] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Forks, North Dakota, where they entered into 
negotiations with a real estate company for 
farm lands in the State, west of that place. 
After a few days of discussion they concluded 
to look over several pieces on the Great 
Northern Railroad. The families were to stay 
at Grand Forks until they returned. They 
occupied their time by visiting the University 
of North Dakota (it has a library of 25,000 
bound volumes and 5,000 pamphlets), the St. 
Bernard Ursuline Academy, and the Grand 
Forks College. They also visited the Public 
Library, and admired the other large build- 
ings. 

After about a week they returned. Two 
sections of land were selected, one for each (a 
section is 640 acres); these were opposite. 
The section road ran between; a brook passed 
back of each section, which gave water for 
their stock all the year. When this country 
was first settled it had been planted with tim- 
ber, so they had an ample supply for firewood. 

[119] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

I was about to tell you the name of the village 
near which these farms were located, but I do 
not wish to embarrass these men by any pub- 
licity; I will say the land is located nearer the 
western boundary of the State than the east- 
ern. They spent about a week in selecting 
household necessaries, farm utensils, and gro- 
ceries. Then they started for their home. 
After arriving at the town, they awaited the 
arrival of their goods, which they transferred 
to the farms. They also purchased in town 
two teams of horses each and some cattle. 
For some of these it was necessary to give their 
notes, and some they acquired on credit. On 
each of these farms there were rather poor 
houses and miserable outbuildings; but what 
matter? Were they not going to make their 
fortunes, and were they not young, happy, and 
full of life? It simply was "loads of fun." 
If you knew them as I knew them, it would 
not be necessary for me to write these lines. 
I wish I could tell you all about these very 
[120] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

interesting families, but I am concerned only 
with the men and I have not the space. 

The first year did not yield a very bounteous 
harvest, for there were many things to be done, 
but the second year told. They had many an 
argument as to the best method to follow, but 
somehow Einar had more bushels of wheat, 
corn, oats, and rye than Ole. In some way, 
his house and outbuildings began to take on a 
thrifty appearance, while Ole's, although im- 
proved, did not look as well. 

One day Ole came over to Einar' s farm, 
where he was busy repairing an old wagon. 
"Oh, Einar, I see you have been whitewashing 
your horse-and-cow stable. What did you do 
that for? It's just throwing away money. 
What good is it, anyway?" 

"Why, really I can't tell you exactly, but 
in some sort o' a way it makes me happy. It 
kind o' makes me feel like whistling — maybe 
assists my digestion. And if a fellow has good 
digestion, I calculate he can do more work." 

[121] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

" There you go again ! My digestion is good 
enough, Lord only knows. I know I don't 
throw time and money away like that." 

"All right, but if I am particular in one thing 
am I not likely to be in another ? And PU be 
blamed if I don't think the cows give more milk 
in a whitewashed barn than they would in one 
not whitewashed." 

"Look here, you make me tired. You're 
always reading, reading all the nonsense the 
agricultural papers have to say, and you be- 
lieve it all. I read them, too, but sort o' skim 
them over. I tell you, too much time is taken in 
reading. It doesn't pay. Well, 'so long/ Want 
to go to town to-night ?" 

"Yes, Ole. I'll be over after you at 
seven." 

"Yes. All right." 

That evening they went to town, Ole smok- 
ing his pipe and Einar doing most of the talk- 
ing. When they reached the town, Ole said 
he had to buy some vinegar, pork, and eggs, 
[122] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

saying he didn't know what was the matter 
with his hens. 

"That's too bad," said Einar. "We have 
had all the eggs we could use, and had chickens 
to kill, and last year we made cider, some of 
which we kept for vinegar. Why don't you 
raise your own pork? And it costs almost 
nothing to feed chickens." 

"Oh, you make me tired. You're so blamed 
practical. I can make more raising grain 
than fooling with those little things. That's 
on a par with your whitewashing business," 
and here he indulged in a hearty laugh, in 
which Einar joined. 

After they had visited at the general store 
and were about "talked out," they went home. 
Things proceeded in this manner. Einar's 
house and outbuildings had been painted. A 
new barn made its appearance. Ole had 
painted, but had not increased his buildings. 
In the winter of the year 191 1 Einar went, 
one evening, over to Ole's house. After they 
[ 123 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

had greeted each other and seated themselves 
by the cheerful fire, Einar said to Ole: "I've 
been reading a great deal about flaxseed in 
the Tress Bulletin' of the North Dakota Agri- 
cultural Experimental Station. I read an 
old bulletin, No. 23, that I ran across, which 
made me hungry for others, so I sent for them 
and got Nos. 39 to 47. Let me read you just 
a few lines of No. 39, December, 1910: 

"The high price of flaxseed and of its 
various by-products, associated with the effects 
of the great drought which has occurred in 
the flaxseed-growing regions of America, tends 
to make the question of cropping of flax one of 
extreme interest/ 

"After reading all these bulletins, I have 
come to the conclusion that there is good 
money to be made by a fellow with brains. 
Now, Fm going to put in two hundred acres 
this spring. Will you do the same?" 

"Well, Einar, let me see. There's that field 
of corn stubble — can't put it in there. No, 
[124] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

neither can I on that oat field. I can take 
two hundred acres of that wheat field, how- 
ever, if you think I can get more out of flax; 
but see here, hold on! Where do you get the 
seed to sow?" 

"Why, you can buy it from the elevator, I 
think." 

"Yes, but I haven't got the money. Haven't 
paid up all my note for last year's seed." 

"Well, I have a thousand dollars in the 
bank I have saved. I'll let you have enough 
to buy what you need, which will be — let 
me see — one half bushel to the acre for two 
hundred acres is one hundred bushels. Think 
you'll have to pay two to two and a half dol- 
lars per bushel for it. That will be about two 
hundred and fifty dollars. You're welcome 
to it." 

"Well, now, that is fine of you. You're 

always looking out for the fellow that's down — 

but still, I'm not down, only I haven't as much 

money as you have. But one of these days 

[125] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

you'll get a slap from some one that will hurt, 
for they are not all honest in this world." 

"Yes, but Ole is, and he is the fellow Fm 
talking to now. What do you say?" 

"All right. I will do it." 

The seed was purchased and paid for and 
stored in their barns. Spring came, the lands 
were prepared to receive the seed. Some time 
before this, Einar went over to Ole's to see 
him about the seed. 

"You know, Ole, those bulletins I told you 
I have read about flax?" 

"Yes." 

"Well, I have purchased a force pump for 
spraying the seed, which you may use also 
if you like. Let me read what the bulletin 
says. You know, they claim you should 
destroy any germs that may be on the flaxseed 
before seeding. You know there are a lot of 
precautions you should take, such as sowing the 
seed at the proper depth, pulling the weeds in 
the crop as they appear in the summer, and har- 

[126] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

vesting at the right date. You should cut with 
binder whenever possible, thresh it at the first 
opportunity after bolls become dry, and conduct 
a long series of rotation on your farm. You 
should not think of sowing flaxseed more than 
once in five years on the same land. Then, 
there is advice about preparing the seed bed, 
how to treat new land and old land, about 
the variety of soil, date of seeding, rate of 
seeding, seed selection and grading and the 
like; but let me read you about spraying: 
'Treat the seed with formaldehyde, using the 
standard quality, at the rate of sixteen ounces 
to forty gallons of water. Use a spray pump 
which will throw a forceful, misty spray/ 
Here, I won't read it all. You take it and 
read it to-night. " 

"Well, that's the rankest thing I ever heard. 
No, thanks. Keep your bulletin. I've heard 
enough. Why, I have sown flaxseed in the 
old country. I guess these Americans can't 
teach me anything new. You just wait." 
[127] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Yes, but this bulletin says your land might 
be 'sick/ and this formaldehyde will prevent 
it attacking the seed." 

" Ah, ha ! Too rich. I guess you're sick, or if 
you keep on much longer, you will make me sick/ 5 

"All right, but don't blame me." 

The seed went in. The pieces of land were 
opposite one another, separated only by the 
section road. The summer passed, harvest 
time came. Ole was impatient to cut his 
when the bolls were not just right; in places 
the flax looked yellow, no doubt on account 
of fungi. He did not use a binder, because he 
could not wait for one, did not thresh it at 
the right time, lost some by heating, and fi- 
nally turned out a yield of six bushels per acre. 

Einar watched carefully to see that every- 
thing the bulletin said was carried out. He 
had a beautiful "stand" (height of flax), very 
much higher than Ole's on account of being 
free of fungi. When his flax was threshed it 

[128] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

turned out twelve and a half bushels to the 
acre. 

Ole was anxious to pay his obligation to 
Einar, so he sold his flax, amounting to twelve 
hundred bushels, at #1.25 per bushel, equal- 
ing #1,500, and after paying his note he had 
$1,250 left. 

Einar had read that an extra price could be 
obtained for flaxseed that had been treated 
by formaldehyde, and raised on soil free of 
fungi, so he concluded to hold his until the 
next spring, and sell it for seed. He notified 
the North Dakota Agricultural Experimental 
Station, and they put him in touch with men 
that were willing to pay #2.50 per bushel. 
His crop figured out like this: Two hundred 
acres at twelve and a half bushels per acre 
equals twenty-five hundred bushels, and at 
$2.50 per bushel, equals #6,250, while Ole had 
only #1,500, so that Einar received #4,750 
more than Ole. 

Some time after this Einar met Ole. "Ole, 
[ 129] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

come over to-night. You haven't been to my 
house for some time." 

"Very well. I'll be over about seven." 
At the given time Ole came. This evening 
was one of that forty degrees below zero 
kind. The sides of the old, square-box wood 
stove were of a cherry heat, and even at that 
the place was none too comfortable. This 
room was used as a dining-room and sitting- 
room. After supper the square wooden table 
was covered with a red and white squared 
tablecloth that looked like a checker-board. 
These families seemed to like to "rock," so in 
each home there were two rockers, ample in 
size, with those long rockers that make one 
move slowly. After greeting each other, they 
seated themselves in these rockers, near 
enough to the stove to be comfortable. After 
Ole had lighted his pipe, he said: "You know 
John Johnson, the fellow that has that home- 
stead of a hundred and sixty acres on the hill 
west of the town, don't you ?" 
[ 130] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"Yes, I've met him. He seems always to 
act as if he did not like those who were getting 
along. I think he does not care for me/' 

"Well, I will tell you, he seems to me to be 
a man of a good deal of sense. He has read 
a good deal on Socialism. He says things are 
not equal, that he has not had a fair chance, 
and that if he had, he would be in much better 
shape/' 

"But, they say he is the fellow that came 
here ten years ago, and took out his homestead 
on that hill that has about as poor land as any 
around here." 

"Yes, that may be so. He told me he 
might have had part of the land you have if 
he had wanted it, for that was open to home- 
steaders at the time he came, for he has an 
idea the reason you have such good crops is 
your luck in selecting the land." 

"But why did he go way up on that hill?" 

"Oh, he says he was so impressed with the 
view of the beautiful country he could see 

[131] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

from there, and also he thought every one 
around would some day say, 'Who lives there? 
That is a beautiful place. He must have a 
grand view of the country/ He did not pay 
so much attention to the quality of the soil, 
and do you know, the ground is not so bad 
after all" 

"I noticed he did not have sufficient build- 
ings to cover his farming implements, and they 
looked bad and weather-beaten/ 5 

"Yes, but he is a reader." 

With this remark, Ole looked at Einar with 
a twinkle in his eye, and both laughed heartily. 

"Oh, yes, but it is not of the kind that makes 
our farms 'blossom like the rose/" 

"Do you know, Einar, you are right. That 
fellow does not like you. He says you are 
altogether too industrious, that you are grasp- 
ing, that you are not any smarter than any one 
else, only it was your luck to get a splendid 
piece of land, really the best around here." 

"You know better, don't you? When we 
[132] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

came here it was a tough job for both of us, 
and many a time we thought we had made 
a great mistake in locating so far from town, 
and on such rough ground. You know what 
work it has taken to get this ground in 
any sort of condition. Of course, now it looks 
different, and certainly is doing well, but the 
fellows that took out these homesteads were 
anything but good farmers, and we have had to 
pay for their permitting the land to get in such 
condition/' 

"Yes, you're right. I was only telling you 
what he said, but he has heard what you got 
for your flaxseed, and he says you charged too 
much for it. You know, he seems to have 
good arguments to support his theory." 

Einar was silent for some time. He seemed 
to realize that somehow his old friend was 
taking sides with this man, and he could not 
understand it. Finally he said: "That sort 
of reasoning is beyond me. Here we are in 
this United States, and have taken out our 

l I 33J 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

citizens' papers and sworn to protect this 
beautiful country. We want to bring up our 
children so they will be good citizens. We 
should give them a good education, for that is 
the best for them. It is 'up to us' to do it." 

"Well, of course, our children should be edu- 
cated, but Johnson says this land should all be 
under control of the Government, so that all 
would have an equal chance — that it is not 
right for one man to have so much more than 
another." 

"Do you believe that sort of doctrine?" 

"It looks reasonable for him to have as 
much as his neighbor, does it not?" 

"Now, really, how can you think so? Do 
you suppose I would have exerted myself 
by struggling, reading, planning, working late 
and early — my wife and children helping 
me at times ? Do you think I would have stayed 
awake nights, worrying about my crops and 
planning what to sow and when? Do you 
think I would have written to the United 

[134] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

States Agricultural Experimental Station, so I 
might know where to sell my seed to the best 
advantage? Do you think I would have 
given up smoking and all other luxuries for 
the general good? Do you think my wife 
would forego the pleasure of dressing better 
and clothing the children so they would look 
more attractive, just for the public ?" 

"Well, Einar, I think I see your side, and 
I don't know that I blame you, but Johnson 
says the country needs men like you to help 
along, that you would have a lot of glory, 
and maybe a wreath would be placed on your 
head, or words to that effect. " 

"Yes, I suppose so, but you know Johnson 
has very little sense. He loves to frequent the 
saloon. I know he doesn't drink too much, 
but that is the way some of his money goes. 
He is shiftless, is not neat in his dress, and has 
but very little ambition." 

"Yes, but he says you have six hundred and 
forty acres of land and he has but one hundred 
[135] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

and sixty acres, and asks me if I think that is 
fair." 

"Now, John Johnson is John Johnson, and 
I am Einar Malstad. He is his own self, and 
does as he sees fit. He enjoys himself as he 
thinks best, spends his money and time to his 
own liking, reads all the books he can on 
Socialism. Can you say that I have not 
the same right ? Why should Johnson find fault 
with me? I haven't spoken to him. We 
are made differently. Would it not be better 
for him to blame his Maker, for I certainly 
had nothing to do with making him." 

"You seem to have good logic, but in some 
way Johnson puts it so cleverly one feels he 
is right. I wonder if it is my sympathy for 
the fellow that is behind it all." 

"Maybe it is, but misplaced sympathy is 
apt to do a lot of harm, for we are told that 
'Man must earn his bread by the sweat of 
his face/ and all nature shows 'the survival 
of the fittest/" 

[136] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"See here, don't you think I worked as hard 
as you did? Didn't I put that flax in at your 
wish? Still you got #4,750 more for your 
crop than I did." 

"Yes, that's so, but you didn't follow the 
advice of the Experimental Station, don't you 
remember? And, besides, don't you think 
that ideas are worth anything?" 

"Ideas? Yes and no — sometimes yes and 
sometimes no." 

Ole was getting a little peevish, had rocked 
so fast and strenuously that he came bump 
against the stove, which put an end to his 
answer. Both rocked forward and back, their 
shadows running up and down the side of the 
room. 

Finally, Einar spoke: "Do you think, Ole, 
if you had got the #4,750 more than I did, you 
would have come to me and offered me part or 
half?" 

Without a moment's hesitation, he said, 
"Yes, I would." 

[ 137] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF S OCIALISM 

Then there was a long, long pause. At last 
Einar said : " Do you know, you make me feel 
like a terribly mean fellow, and yet, when I 
think of the love and feeling I have always had 
for you, how I lent you money to buy the 
flaxseed, and tried my best to assist you in 
getting a good crop, my conscience tells me Ole 
is mistaken." 

"Still, I feel differently since I have heard 
Johnson talk, and whatever it is that has come 
into my heart I cannot say, but it makes me 
uncomfortable. I know you have accom- 
modated me often, but Johnson says that's 
what we're put here for." 

"Well, I hope I can be of service to you and 
you may be of service to me. Let us at least 
remain friends." 

Ole stood up to go, but his face did not have 
the usual pleasant, friendly look as in former 
visits. He turned, extended his hand, saying, 
"Good-night; hope to see you to-morrow." 

Two or three days passed. Einar was busy 

[138] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

in his barn (I have forgotten what he was 
doing), when, with a bang, open went the 
barn door and in blew Ole and a cloud of 
snow. "Whew, but this is a blizzard that is 
one." 

"Hello, Ole, how are you?" 

"Oh, so-so. Do you know, I never saw 
such a driving snowstorm and such fierce cold. 
Wasn't it cold night before last?" 

"I should say it was. I thought my stock 
would suffer, but seemingly they have not." 

" Did you hear that Johnson lost one of his 
horses?" 

"No. Is that so?" 

"Yes. I was told he went to town, and for- 
got to put in his blankets. He stayed in one 
of the stores and became so interested in con- 
versation that he forgot it was so cold. They 
say the horse was chilled through." 

"I'm mighty sorry for him." 

"Do you know, Einar, every time I come in 
this whitewashed barn of yours, I have a cozy 
[ 139] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

feeling. It seems so cheerful, and see, it is 
quite dark outside, but in here, quite light/' 

"Yes, it makes a difference on days like this 
or on rainy days." 

"What have you piled up in those bags 
back there?" 

Einar laughed. "Oh, I have some choice 
seeds; the best is some oats. I read about 
oats that were a big yielder and weighed forty- 
eight pounds to the bushel, so I sent for them." 

" Do you mean to say forty-eight pounds to 
the bushel ? Why, our oats last year weighed 
only thirty-four pounds, and you know we had 
a fine stand." 

"Yes, I know it, but you just look at this." 
They walked over to the pile of bags, and Einar 
pulled a bag down and opened it. "How's 
that?" he said, as he passed Ole a handful. 

"Well, if that isn't immense! I wouldn't 
have believed it, and it is so plump. Why, it 
looks almost like wheat. Can I get some?" 

"No, this is all they had, but I tell you, 
[ Ho] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

there is enough to sow forty acres. I will let 
you have enough for ten acres if you would 
like it." 

"Are you sure you want to spare that ?" 

"Certainly. Now, I'll tell you what I'm 
going to do. I ran across a book by Luther 
Burbank, and he says 'raise your own seed, 
and be sure to pick out the best. This you 
can do by marking out the place in the field 
where the stand is the best, and the color 
shows a strong and vigorous growth/ These 
are not his words, but only as I remember 
them. So I am going to follow his advice. 
Will you?" 

"Why, certainly. That looks reasonable. 
What under the sun is that old tin nailed on 
the platform the bags are on ?" 

"That is some old tin I had lying around. 
You see, Fve made this platform to rest on 
two twelve-inch timbers, so the platform will 
be one foot above the floor, and this tin nailed, 
as you see, so it extends or sticks out eight 

[hi] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

inches beyond the platform, prevents the rats 
from climbing up and eating holes in my bags 
and devouring the seed grain. " 

"Well, they say you 'beat the Dutch/ 
although you happen to be a Norwegian. 
What you don't think of isn't worth thinking 
about/' At this remark both laughed heartily. 

" I will keep the oats here, Ole, until spring, 
if you say so." 

"Thanks ever so much." 

After some further conversation Ole bid 
Einar "so long/' and went home. 

I saw Einar some few years later, and he 
told me he then owned nine hundred and sixty 
acres of land, his children were all in school, 
and that his eldest son was preparing for col- 
lege. I do not remember seeing a finer speci- 
men of a Norwegian — the picture of health 
and happiness. 

I cannot follow these men any further only 
to say that Ole became a strong Socialist, and 
he finally called Einar a capitalist and robber, 
[ 142] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

because, he said, he charged too much for his 
flaxseed for seeding, that he took it out of the 
poor farmers who needed it more than he did, 
and some of them were poorly fixed. So these 
friends became bitter enemies, and Ole would 
not speak to Einar. 

It is Ole's flaxseed I want to follow still 
further. He got #1.25 per bushel for it. 
This amount and what he got from the bal- 
ance of his farm gave him about enough to 
support his family, after paying interest on 
notes and taxes. This flaxseed was shipped to 
Duluth, and sold for $1.50 per bushel, the 
freight being 25 cents per bushel. Finally 
the flaxseed reached Buffalo, costing the mill 
there $1.58 per bushel. The seed was crushed 
and made into linseed oil, and the by-product 
called "oil-cake." 

The men working in that mill got the wages 
usual for such employment. The proprietor, 
whom the Socialists would call a capitalist, 
organized an office force, bought the seed, sold 

[143] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the oil and oil-cake, the former in America, 
the latter in Holland. The oil-cake brought 
54 cents a bushel, and the oil #1.35, making a 
total of #1.89. Cost of seed $1.58 plus 30 
cents for working, making #1.88, left one 
cent per bushel profit which, on the yearly 
quantity worked, five million bushels, gave 
a profit of #50,000 on the investment. 

In this instance, the manufacturer got all 
he could in a competitive market for both his 
oil and oil-cake, while Ole sold his flax for 
what he could get. The profits were their 
pay for their labor. The reason Ole did not 
receive more profit was because he received 
all he was worth. If a manufacturer ran 
without profit, then he would be of no value. 
If he ran at a loss, he would soon seek some 
other occupation; and, as there are more 
failures in business than successes, this is 
going on all the time. 

Now, the claim is made that the laborers 
produce all the wealth. Let us admit, for the 
[144] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

sake of argument, that the laborers are the 
men that work in this factory or mill at man- 
ual labor, using the machinery. The claim is 
made that the machinery belongs to them 
because labor (?) produced it. Most all the 
workingmen in this mill are foreigners, so 
they could not claim that their own country 
laboring men produced it. And suppose that 
the laboring men who produced the machinery 
were dead; do these laboring men now 
living claim it by inheritance? Why is it 
not as fair that those having the legal right 
by inheritance should own it? Take this 
profit of one cent per bushel which the manu- 
facturer claims is his labor profit (or anything 
one wants to call it). Why does it belong to 
the laboring men at the mill? Why should 
not Ole, the one who first produced the seed, 
have the one cent per bushel, or the men work- 
ing for the railroad over which the seed was 
transferred, or the steamboat workmen of the 
boat on which it was shipped? 

[145] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The trouble with this whole socialistic busi- 
ness is that God did not see fit to make men 
equal, and man cannot do what God has not 
cared to do. If you could have a God on earth 
who would act as a father, then probably 
things might be different, but the attempt to 
regulate the value of a man's service by a body 
of men egotistical, unequal physically, unequal 
in brain power, of unequal environment, unlike 
in religion and in passions, is a demand for a 
miracle. The incentive for our best men to put 
forth all their energy would largely be lost, and 
that certainly would be maladroit. A far bet- 
ter way would be to keep talent at its most 
productive point and regulate it in a way that 
I shall attempt to show later. 



[i 4 6] 



THE THINKER 

Back of the beating hammer 

By which the steel is wrought, 
Back of the workshop's clamor 

The seeker may find the Thought,— 
The Thought that is ever master 

Of iron and steam and steel, 
That rises above disaster 

And tramples it under heel! 

The drudge may fret and tinker 

Or labor with dusty blows, 
But back of him stands the Thinker, 

The clear-eyed man who Knows; 
For into each plow or saber 

Each piece and part and whole, 
Must go the Brains of Labor, 

Which give the work a soul ! 

Back of the motor's humming, 
Back of the belts that sing, 

Back of the hammer's drumming, 
Back of the cranes that swing, 

There is the eye which scans them 
Watching through stress and strain, 

[147] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

There is the Mind which plans them — 
Back of the brawn the Brain! 

Might of the roaring boiler, 

Force of the engine's thrust, 
Strength of the sweating toiler — 

Greatly in these we trust; 
But back of them stands the Schemer 

The Thinker who drives things through; 
Back of the Job — the Dreamer 

Who makes the dream come true! 

— Berton Braley. 



The Stability 
of a Republic Rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 



CHAPTER VII 

THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 

A republic is "a state in which the sover- 
eignty resides in the people, and the adminis- 
tration is lodged in officers elected by and 
representing the people; a representative de- 
mocracy." " A democracy is a political system 
in which government is exercised directly by 
the people collectively; government by the 
people." — Students' Dictionary. 

The varieties of republics have been, and 
are, many, but there were not until recently 
republics such as we have here in the United 
States, where the rights of all men are equal. 
I believe it will be well to make room here for 
the Declaration of Independence. It may do 
us all good to read it again, as our first great 
resentment of too much government control. 

[151] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 



THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE 

"When in the Course of human events it 
becomes necessary for one people to dissolve 
the political bands which have connected them 
with another, and to assume among the 
powers of the earth the separate and equal 
station to which the Laws of Nature and of 
Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect 
to the opinions of mankind requires that they 
should declare the causes which impel them to 
the separation. 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: 
that all men are created equal, that they are 
endowed by their Creator with certain in- 
alienable Rights, that among these are Life, 
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That 
to secure those rights, Governments are in- 
stituted among Men, deriving their just pow- 
ers from the consent of the governed, That 
whenever any Form of Government becomes 
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the 

[152] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute 
a new Government, laying its foundation on 
such principles, and organizing its powers in 
such form, as to them shall seem most likely 
to effect their Safety and Happiness. Pru- 
dence, indeed, will dictate that Governments 
long established should not be changed for 
light and transient causes; and accordingly 
all experience hath shown that mankind are 
more disposed to suffer, while evils are suffer- 
able, than to right themselves by abolishing 
the forms to which they are accustomed. 
But, when a long train of abuses and usurpa- 
tions, pursuing invariably the same object, 
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute 
Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, 
to throw off such Government, and to provide 
new guards for their future security. Such 
has been the patient sufferance of these 
colonies; and such is now the necessity which 
constrains them to alter their former System 
of Government. The history of the present 

[153] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

King of Great Britain is a history of repeated 
injuries and usurpations, all having in direct 
object the establishment of an absolute Tyr- 
anny over these States. To prove this, let 
Facts be submitted to a candid world. 

"He had refused his Assent to Laws, the 
most wholesome and necessary for the public 
good. 

"He has forbidden his governors to pass 
laws of immediate and pressing importance, 
unless suspended in their operation till his 
assent should be obtained; and when so sus- 
pended, he has utterly neglected to attend to 
them. 

"He has refused to pass other laws for the 
accommodation of large districts of people, 
unless those people would relinquish the right 
of Representation in the Legislature, a right 
inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants 
only. 

"He has called together legislative bodies 
at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant 
[iS4l 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

from the depository of their public Records, 
for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into com- 
pliance with his measures. 

"He has dissolved Representative Houses 
repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness 
his invasions on the rights of the people. 

"He has refused for a long time, after such 
dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; 
whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of 
Annihilation, have returned to the People 
at large for their exercise; the State remaining 
in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of 
invasion from without, and convulsions within. 

"He has endeavored to prevent the popu- 
lation of these States; for that purpose ob- 
structing the Laws for Naturalization of 
foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage 
their migrations hither, and raising the condi- 
tions of new Appropriations of Lands. 

"He has obstructed the Administration of 
Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for 
establishing Judiciary Powers. 

[155] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"He has made Judges dependent on his 
Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and 
the amount and payment of their salaries. 

"He has erected a multitude of new offices, 
and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass 
our people, and eat out their substance. 

"He has kept among us, in times of peace, 
Standing Armies without the consent of our 
Legislature. 

"He has affected to render the Military 
independent of and superior to the Civil 
power. 

"He has combined with others (that is, 
with the lords and commons of Britain) to 
subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our 
constitution, and unacknowledged by our 
laws; giving his assent to their acts of pre- 
tended legislation: 

"For quartering large bodies of armed 
troops among us: 

"For protecting them, by a mock Trial, 
from punishment for any Murders which they 

[ 156 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

should commit on the Inhabitants of these 
States: 

"For cutting off our Trade with all parts 
of the world: 

"For imposing Taxes on us without our 
Consent: 

"For depriving us in many cases of the 
benefits of Trial by jury: 

" For transporting us beyond seas to be tried 
for pretended offences: 

" For abolishing the free system of English 
Laws in a neighboring Province, establishing 
therein an Arbitrary government, and en- 
larging its Boundaries so as to render it at once 
an example and fit instrument for introducing 
the same absolute rule into these Colonies: 

" For taking away our Charters, abolishing 
our most valuable Laws, and altering funda- 
mentally the Forms of our Governments: 

" For suspending our own Legislatures, and 
declaring themselves invested with power to 
legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. 

[157] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"He has abdicated Government here, by 
declaring us out of his Protection, and waging 
War against us. 

"He has plundered our seas, ravaged our 
Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the 
lives of our people. 

"He is, at this time, transporting large 
armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the 
works of death, desolation and tyranny, al- 
ready begun with circumstances of Cruelty 
& Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most bar- 
barous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of 
a civilized nation. 

"He has constrained our Fellow-Citizens 
taken captive on the high Seas to bear Arms 
against their Country, to become the execu- 
tioners of their friends and Brethren, or to 
fall themselves by their hands. 

"He has excited domestic insurrections 
amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on 
the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless 
Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare 

[158] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, 
sexes and conditions. 

"In every stage of these Oppressions, We 
have Petitioned for Redress in the most hum- 
ble terms; our repeated Petitions have been 
answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, 
whose character is thus marked by every act 
which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the 
ruler of a free people. 

"Nor have We been wanting in attentions 
to our British brethren. We have warned 
them from time to time of attempts by their 
legislature to extend an unwarrantable juris- 
diction over us. We have reminded them of 
the circumstances of our emigration and settle- 
ment here. We have appealed to their native 
justice and magnanimity, and we have con- 
jured them, by the ties of our common kindred 
to disavow these usurpations, which would 
inevitably interrupt our connections and cor- 
respondence. They too have been deaf to 
the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We 

[159] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity 
which denounces our Separation, and hold 
them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies 
in War, in Peace, Friends. 

"WE, THEREFORE, the Representa- 
tives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN 

General Congress Assembled, appealing to 
the Supreme Judge of the world for the recti- 
tude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by 
the authority of the good People of these Col- 
onies, solemnly publish and declare, That 
these United Colonies are, and of Right ought 

tO be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES; that 

they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the 
British Crown, and that all political connec- 
tion between them and the State of Great 
Britain is, and ought to be totally dissolved; 
and that as free and independent States, 
they have full Power to levy War, conclude 
Peace, contract Alliances, establish Com- 
merce, and to do all other Acts and Things 
which independent States may of right do. 
[ 160 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

And for the support of this Declaration, with 
a firm reliance on the protection of Divine 
Providence, We mutually pledge to each 
other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred 
Honour." 

Does not the breast of every American swell 
with pride when he thinks of the enthusiasm, 
the sublime inspiration, the high moral pur- 
pose, the trust in the "protection of Divine 
Providence," of those noble, brave, patriotic 
men, ready to give up their all for love of 
country? I doubt if we now have the high 
creative powers these men were capable of 
exercising. When one reflects that Thomas 
Jefferson was but thirty-three years of age 
when he wrote this Declaration, one feels that 
he was inspired. Can you see any indication 
of class hatred, or any hate, in this document ? 
It does not mention anything about "master" 
or "slave/ When one compares the Social- 
ists and their aspirations, their uncertainties, 
[161] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

their lack of unity, with the motives that 
controlled the signers of the Declaration of 
Independence, then it is that the hearts of 
many overflow with love and admiration for 
those who were willing to make such colossal 
sacrifices. And what better constitutional 
government can we have than ours, a consti- 
tution that has been amended but seventeen 
times in 125 years? Take into consideration 
the number of years expended in its final 
framing, the amendments proposed, the men- 
tality of the men engaged in the work and the 
number of years it has stood the test; then 
read some of the Socialists' literature, in 
which they propose to make all sorts of changes 
in the Constitution. You will be able to see 
their great difference from the Fathers. 

Our republican form of government shows 
the purpose of protecting all, the rich and the 
poor, the strong and the weak. A better form 
of government we cannot have. It is broad 
enough to spread its wings over all. If we 

[162] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

have suffered wrongs, they can be made right 
and are being made right. The laws can be 
changed or new ones formed indirectly by our 
suffrage, to which all citizens are entitled. It 
is fatuous to say "The capitalists have con- 
trol of our government. " It is not wise to 
convey to men's minds impressions so incon- 
gruous. It is not wise to say to the manual 
laboring men, "You are slaves"; that demor- 
alizes them. It is better to say, "You are 
men. You are in the majority; you may be 
masters." It is proper to remind them that 
although the capitalists have more property, 
they are in the minority. Therefore it is 
their own fault if they do not see to it that 
proper laws are placed on the statute books. 
You should not hate the capitalist, for that, 
too, is degrading — not only so, but you will 
get along faster if you do not. Educate your- 
selves ; for if you do not, you will be unfit for 
self-government. — Say to them (if you think 
so) : "The laws are bad, and if you are in the 
[163] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

majority, your condition is the direct reflex 
of your responsibility/' If the capitalists 
are in the minority, and yet make the laws 
(through their influence over the majority) 
our condition is still the indirect reflex of intel- 
ligence. If the majority (laboring men) do 
not make the laws (which they say are bad), 
paradoxical as it may seem, the laboring man 
is then the direct reflex of ignorance. There- 
fore it is not a fact, as charged by a large per- 
centage of Socialists, that the capitalists are 
responsible for all the suffering and almost 
everything else bad in the United States, 
while the laboring men's condition is a reflex 
of their own ignorance. If the majority in 
number would do their duty, voting for the 
good of all, and were not influenced by selfish 
motives, or false arguments, or money con- 
siderations, or whatever causes the majority 
to vote as persuaded by the minority, results 
would be different. Whatever their motive, 
whether selfishness, self-love, or ignorance, it 

[i6 4 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

seems fair to say that the blame rests at the feet 
of the laboring man. 

FIVE AND FIFTY 

If fifty men did all the work 

And gave the price to five, 
And let those five make all the rules — 
You'd say the fifty men were fools, 

Unfit to be alive. 

And if you heard complaining cries 

From fifty brawny men, 
Blaming the five for graft and greed, 
Injustice, cruelty indeed — 

What would you call them then? 

Not by their own superior force 

Do five on fifty live, 
But by election and assent — 
And privilege of government — 

Powers that the fifty give. 

If fifty men are really fools, 

And five have all the brains, 
The five must rule as now, we'll find; 
But if the fifty have the mind — 

Why don't they take the reins? 

— Charlotte Perkins Gilman. 

[165] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

There is no profit in deceiving ourselves. 
It should be the duty of all classes, rich or 
poor, to search for the facts. If the capitalists 
can improve the laws, they should strive to do 
so. If the laboring men are ignorant, and 
that fact is blocking their way, they should 
realize it and see to it that they or their 
children are educated. What gain is there if 
both stand "making faces'' at each other? (I 
do not like that expression, but it seems to 
relieve my disgust.) Those in the one class 
who do nothing should make a great effort to 
lend a helping hand to make conditions differ- 
ent. They should give some little time to 
reflection; should curb their selfish disposi- 
tions; should realize their responsibility to 
others not so fortunate; for, if one class is 
more intelligent, and has received from the 
Great Unknown better faculties, certainly 
their moral responsibility is greater; and who 
shall say that their day of reckoning will not 
come ? 

[166] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

There is no denying the fact that money is 
centred at the present time more in the hands 
of the few than it ever was before in this 
country. There is no denying the fact that 
there is more discontent. There is no denying 
that this fact is due to the superior intelligence 
of those in whose hands the money is retained. 
But when the capitalists use their power to 
oppress, then they have become less intelli- 
gent. Bancroft has said, in his history of 
the United States, "A government which 
adopts a merely selfish policy is pronounced 
to be 'the foe of the human family.'" There- 
fore, my reader, no matter who you may be, 
begin at once to consider well who you are, 
what you are, where you are going, what you 
are here for, your responsibility, your self-love 
or selfish nature, and, above all, your loyalty 
to your Revolutionary forefathers, who made 
such great efforts to build up a country where 
one could say, "It is the land of the free and 
the home of the brave" ; for only through such 

[167] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

aspirations can we arrive at such a state of 
content as is possible on this earth of ours. 

I have spoken of the intelligence of the 
"bourgeoisie" or capitalists. I wish to quote 
from the "Manifesto of the Communist 
Party," by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: 

"The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improve- 
ment of all instruments of production, by the 
immensely facilitated means of communica- 
tion, draws all, even the most barbarous, na- 
tions into civilization. The cheap prices of 
its commodities are the heavy artillery with 
which it batters down all Chinese walls, and 
with which it overcomes the barbarians' in- 
tensely obstinate hatred of foreigners for 
capitulation. It compels all nations, on pain 
of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of 
production; it compels them to introduce 
what it calls civilization into their midst, 
i.e., to become bourgeois themselves. In one 
word, it creates a world after its own image. 
[ 168 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"The bourgeoisie has subjected the country 
to the rule of the towns. It has created 
enormous cities, has greatly increased the 
urban population as compared with the rural, 
and has thus rescued a considerable part of the 
population from the idiocy of rural life. Just 
as it has made the country dependent on the 
towns, so it has made barbarian and semi- 
barbarian countries dependent on the civilized 
ones, nations of peasants on nations of bour- 
geois, the East on the West. 

"The bourgeoisie keeps more and more 
doing away with the scattered state of the 
population, of the means of production, and 
of property. It has agglomerated population, 
centralized means of production, and has 
concentrated property in a few hands. The 
necessary consequence of this was political 
centralization. Independent or but loosely 
connected provinces, with separate interests, 
laws, governments, and systems of taxation, 
become lumped together into one nation, with 

[i6 9 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

one government, one code of laws, one na- 
tional class interest, one frontier, and one 
customs' tariff. 

"The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce 
one hundred years, has created more massive 
and more colossal productive forces than have 
all preceding generations together. Subjec- 
tion of Nature's forces to man, machinery, 
application of chemistry to industry and 
agriculture, steam navigation, railways, elec- 
tric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents 
for cultivation, canalization of rivers, whole 
populations conjured out of the ground — what 
earlier century had even a presentiment that 
such productive forces slumbered in the lap 
of social labor ?" — Pages 13 and 14. 

This was written prior to 1848. The same 
state of affairs prevails in this country to-day. 
Please observe that the bourgeoisie "has 
created/' etc., the things mentioned. If they 
did create, then are they not entitled to them ? 
But in all socialistic literature and in lectures, 
[170] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

it is claimed that "Socialism cannot contem- 
plate confiscation of existing wealth, for the 
simple reason that the wealth of society to-day 
is the property of the working class; they pro- 
duced it; they would be taking their own"; 
that capital is " surplus labor/' etc., so here 
seems to be a contradiction. They want to 
"raise the proletariat (laboring men) to the 
position of the ruling class." If they do, then 
they will collectively (although there will be 
rich and poor even in this class) become capi- 
talists by the confiscation of all that the 
capitalists have "created," which they say 
would be honest! 

Speaking "by and large," socialistic govern- 
ment cannot be successful in this democratic 
republic. It is ^raz-democratic, for it seeks 
to divide the people into classes — warring 
factions. It is not for all the people. The 
laboring class also are divided in their propa- 
ganda, i.e., government by the laboring class; 
and Socialism needs all factions for success. 

[171] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

It seeks to substitute the least intelligent in 
the place of the most intelligent. It seeks to 
stir man's baser nature by applying the title 
"slave" to free men. It hopes that anger 
may prove of more force than love. This 
(as stated before) is against the law of progress, 
and is demoralizing to the people generally. 

How strange it is that men look at things 
in such different lights, — for I see no more 
chance for the success of Socialism than for 
the sun's destruction of this earth of ours, — 
while others seem to think that Socialism will 
surely prevail. There are in this country 
millions of men of high intelligence, including 
professional men, farmers, business men, labor- 
ing men and others, who are not Socialists. 
These men, I think, will require better reasons 
than I have been able to find to persuade 
them to attach themselves to the Socialist 
Party. 

Here is what a very prominent Socialist 
has to say about an idea of government : 
[172] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"The Socialist, in the brilliant simile of 
Karl Marx, sees that a lone fiddler in his room 
needs no director; he can rap himself to order, 
with his fiddle at his shoulder, and start his 
dancing tune, and stop whenever he likes. 
But just as soon as you have an orchestra, 
you must also have an orchestra director — a 
central directing authority. If you don't, you 
may have a Salvation Army pow-wow; you 
may have a Louisiana negro breakdown; you 
may have an orthodox Jewish synagogue, 
where every man sings in whatever key he 
likes, but you won't have harmony — im- 
possible! 

"Our system of production is in the nature 
of an orchestra. No one man, no one town, 
no one State, can be said any longer to be inde- 
pendent of the others; the whole people of 
the United States, every individual therein, is 
dependent and interdependent upon all the 
others. The nature of the machinery of 
production, the subdivision of labor (which 

[173] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

aids co-operation, and which co-operation fos- 
ters, and which is necessary to the plentifulness 
of production that civilization requires), com- 
pel a harmonious working together of all 
departments of labor, and hence compel the 
establishment of a Central Directing Author- 
ity, of an Orchestral Director, so to speak, of the 
orchestra of the Co-operative Commonwealth. 

"Such is the State or Government that the 
Socialist revolution carries in its womb. To- 
day, production is left to Anarchy, and only 
Tyranny, the twin sister of Anarchy, is or- 
ganized. 

"Socialism, accordingly, implies organiza- 
tion; organization implies directing authority; 
and the one and the other are strict reflections 
of the revolutions undergone by the tools of 
production. Reform, on the other hand, skims 
the surface, and with 'Referendums' and sim- 
ilar devices limits itself to external tinkerings." 
— "Reform or Revolution" by Daniel De Leon, 
pp. 7 and 8. 

[174] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

How does this compare with the Declara- 
tion of Independence? Who would be the 
"orchestra director ?" What a king he would 
be when he divided the fruits of their labor 
between the "fiddlers" and the other members 
of the orchestra ! 

Here is also something said about an idea, 
in the "Manifesto of the Communist Party": 

"In short, the Communists (Socialists) 
everywhere support every revolutionary move- 
ment against the existing social and political 
order of things. 

"In all these movements they bring to the 
front, as the leading question in each, the 
property question, no matter what its degree 
of development at the time. 

"Finally they labor everywhere for the 
union and agreement of the democratic parties 
of all countries. 

"The Communists disdain to conceal their 
views and aims. They openly declare that 
their ends can be attained only by the forcible 

[175] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

overthrow of all existing Social conditions. 
Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communis- 
tic (Socialistic) revolution. The proletarians 
have nothing to lose but their chains. They 
have a world to win ! 

" Workingmen of all countries unite !" 

These Socialists propose to "construct a 
properly economic organization/' Now, as 
soon as possible, how does this "properly 
constructed economic organization' ' propose 
to get control of all the producing power of 
the land ? The following dialogue was printed 
on November 14, 1914, in The Weekly People, 
published in New York City : 

"UNCLE SAM AND BROTHER JONATHAN" 

Brother Jonathan. — "To me it is very clear 
that the Socialist program will go to smash 
against the moral sense of the American 
people." 

Uncle Sam. — "Inasmuch as to which?" 

[176] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

B. J. — "Inasmuch as that the moral sense of 
the American people will revolt against the idea 
of confiscation" 

U. S. — " Confiscation ? For instance ? " 

B. J. — "The Socialists will, for instance, tell 
you point-blank that they mean to appropri- 
ate the railroads without indemnifying their 
owners." 

U. S.— " Suppose they did!" 

B. J. — "That is confiscation, and confisca- 
tion is an immoral act! and no moral people 
like the American would countenance such 
a thing." 

U. S. (after a pause). — "What is the name 
of the Austrian village in which you were 
born?" 

B. J. (nonplussed). — "Austrian village! I 
was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts." 

U. S. — "Oh, I mean your father; in what 
Austrian village was he born?" 

B. J. — "My father was born in Boston, 
sir, near the Boston common." 
[ 177] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

U. S. — "So! Well, it must have been your 
mother. What Austrian village does she hail 
from?" 

B. J. (very indignant). — "Do you call Lynn 
an ' Austrian village?' You know very well 
she was born in Lynn." 

U. S. — "Well, I mean your father's mother 
or your mother's father. In what Austrian 
village were they born?" 

B. J. (very haughtily). — "I want you to un- 
derstand that not only was I born here, and my 
parents, too, but all my four grand-parents, 
and all their grand-parents were born in this 
country; we are of pure Mayflower extraction, 
and New England stock." 

U. S. — "Then you all descend from the 
neighborhood where Bunker Hill Monument 
now stands?" 

B. J.— "Exactly." 

U. S. — "Then you feel very proud about 
the American Revolution, do you not?" 

B. J.— "Don't YOU?" 
[178] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

U. S. — "I do, assuredly. And do you 
think our ancestors acted immorally on that 
occasion?" 

B, J.— "Certainly not! Do YOU?" 

U. S. — "Of course not. But will you oblige 
me by imparting to me a certain information 
after which my heart now yearns?" 

B. J.— "With pleasure." 

U. S. — "How much indemnity did our 
ancestors pay King George when they took the 
colonies away from him?" 

B. J.— "Indemnity?" 

U. S. — "Yes, my sweet preacher of mo- 
rality — ' indemnity/ " 

B. J. — "You are not crazy?" 

U. S. — "Were not our ancestors moral?" 

B. J.— "Certainly." 

U. S. — "Did not King George own these 
colonies?" 

B. J.— "Yes." 

U. S. — "And were they not yanked away 
from him?" 

[179] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

B. J. — " Certainly ! And wasn't that right ?" 

U. S. — "You see, I am no 'moralist'; you 
are the moralist. Tell me how much 'indem- 
nity' our ancestors paid King George for hav- 
ing yanked his property away from him? 
According to you, for a people to take a thing 
without giving the owner indemnity is im- 
moral. King George owned the colonies; 
they were taken away from him ; and our an- 
cestors who did the taking were moral. It 
follows that they must have indemnified 
him." 

(B. J. remains stupefied.) 

U. S.— "Hullo, there! The indemnity!" 

(B. J. fidgets about.) 

U. S. — "You don't seem to hear (yelling 
in his ear). The indemnity! The indemnity! 
How much indemnity did King George get ?" 

B. J. (exasperated). — "None! Hang you; 
none!" 

U. S. — "And yet our ancestors were moral ?" 

B. J. — "Stop — tell me how it is. I admit 
[ 180 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

I don't quite understand it. Was it immoral 
on the part of our ancestors not to indemnify 
King George ?" 

U. S. — "No; it was not immoral. If they 
had, they would have been stupid. You 
don't indemnify the highway robber for the 
stolen goods you take back from him, do 
you?" 

B.J.— "Nixy." 

U. S. — "Neither does a nation. The ques- 
tion is simply this: Does the American people 
need the railroads in order to live ? If they do, 
the railroads can be and must be appropri- 
ated, just the same as the colonies were, 
without indemnity. Moreover, such appropri- 
ation is eminently just. The present owners 
of the railroads and of all other machinery and 
land needed by the people never produced 
them. The land is nature's gift, the machin- 
ery is the product of the brain and manual 
labor of the working class, stolen from them 
by the capitalist class. To take this property 
[181] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

is but to restore it to its owners. The same 
common sense — and morality is always on the 
side of common sense — that caused our an- 
cestors to yank the colonies out of the clutches 
of the British Crown without indemnity will 
guide our people to vote themselves into 
power and to legislate the land and the capital 
back into their own hands. The immorality 
lies on the side of the thieves who stole the 
people's heritage and are now seeking to 
keep it." 

And, from the same paper, you will see how 
the farmers will come out: 

"C. T. W., Cleveland, O.— You desire to 
know 'how Socialism, under the Socialist 
Labor Party, is going to benefit the American 
farmer?' If by 'farmer' you mean the farm 
owner, we should say that he will benefit in 
the same way that the capitalist will benefit : 
he will have 'his' land taken away from him, 
the same as the capitalist will have 'his' 
establishment taken away from him, and be 
[182] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

given a chance to go to work and enjoy the fruits 
of the social labor which he renders society." 

Here is still another kind of Socialist — 
"The Truth about Socialism/' page 65 —Allan 
L. Benson. 

"The Government shall immediately pro- 
ceed to take over the ownership of all the 
trusts that control more than 40 per cent, of 
the business in their respective lines. 

"The price to be paid for these industries 
shall be fixed by a commission of fifteen ex- 
perts, whose duty it shall be to determine the 
actual cash values of the physical properties. 

"Payment for the properties shall be prof- 
fered in the form of United States bonds, 
bearing 2 per cent, interest payable in fifty 
years, and a sinking fund shall be established 
to retire the bonds at maturity. 

"In the event of the refusal of any trust- 
owner or owners to sell to the Government his 
or their properties at the price fixed by the 
commission of experts, the President of the 

[183] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

United States is authorized to use such 
measures as may be necessary to gain and hold 
possession of the properties. 

"A Bureau of Industries is hereby created 
within the Department of Commerce and 
Labor to operate all industries owned by the 
Government." 

Here is what John Spargo says in his book 
on "Socialism": 

"Once more I shall appeal to the authority 
of Marx. Engels wrote in 1894: 'We do not 
at all consider the indemnification of the pro- 
prietors as an impossibility, whatever may be 
the circumstances. How many times has not 
Karl Marx expressed to me the opinion that if 
we could buy up the whole crowd it would 
really be the cheapest way of relieving our- 
selves of them/ Not only Marx, then, in the 
most intimate of discussions with Engels, his 
bosom friend, but Engels himself, in almost 
his last days, refused to admit the impossi- 

[184] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

bility of paying indemnity for properties social- 
ized, 'whatever may be the circumstances.' 

" Suppose the Socialists to be in power: there 
is a popular demand, say, for the socializa- 
tion of the steel industry. The Government 
decides to take over the plant of the Steel 
Trust and all its affairs, and the support of the 
vast majority of its people is assured. First 
a valuation takes place, and then bonds, gov- 
ernment bonds, are issued. Unlike what 
happens too often at the present time, the 
price fixed is not greatly in excess of the value 
the people acquire — one of the means by which 
the capitalists fasten their clutches on the 
popular throat. The Socialist spirit enters 
into the business. Bonds are issued to all the 
shareholders in strict proportion to their hold- 
ings, and so the poor widow, concerning whose 
interests critics of Socialism are so solicitous, 
gets bonds for her share. She is, therefore, 
even more secure than before, since it is no 
longer possible for unscrupulous individuals 

[185] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

to plunder her by nefarious stock trans- 
actions/' 

After we have taken over these trusts, they 
are to work right along smoothly; all of the for- 
mer owners are going to love their work, and 
stay right where they are ! These trusts are not 
to make any profits, and in this way they are 
going to crush out the other 60 per cent, 
of independent capitalists. This, of course, 
means the small people and those interested 
in co-operation in the same line of business, 
whom some Socialists say they approve of 
saving from disaster. Talk about the Rocke- 
feller-Morgan combination ! Why, this scheme 
makes it look "like 30 cents/' 

Then, again, certain Socialists would make 
these changes. Returning to Allan L. Benson, 
"The Truth about Socialism/' page 54: 

"Socialists would abolish the senate, thus 
vesting the entire legislative power in the 
house of representatives. They would take 
from the President the power to appoint jus- 

[186] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

tices of the supreme court, and give the people 
the right to elect all judges. They would 
take from the United States supreme court 
the usurped power to declare acts of congress 
unconstitutional, and give to the people the 
power to say what acts of congress should be 
set aside. They would make the constitu- 
tion of the United States amendable by major- 
ity vote, and they would make every public 
official in the country, from President down, 
subject to immediate recall at any time, by 
the vote of the people." 

This takes from the President the power to 
appoint justices of the supreme court. Mind 
you, they would not trust their own President 
(for they would have elected him), and would 
change the Constitution of the United States 
to suit themselves. Now, my reader, if you are 
a Socialist, are you sure all your comrades 
would agree to this ? Are you sure some would 
not demand that no President or representative 
be elected? 

[187] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The same author, on page 51 of a pamphlet 
entitled "The Truth about Socialism," makes 
this frank acknowledgement: "Is it any won- 
der that the few who control this machinery 
go mad with the desire to accumulate wealth ? 
Is it any wonder that they press their advan- 
tage to the limit? Are you sure you would 
have done less if you had been placed in their 
circumstances? I am not sure I should have 
done less. In fact, I am quite sure I should 
have done as much, or more, if I could." 

Here is still another: 

"The Socialist Labor Party says to the 
workingman, 'True enough, you must seek 
to capture the government. True enough, 
you must aim at the overthrow of the present 
government, but not as either a finality or a 
starter. The overthrow of the government 
you must aim at must be to the end of using 
the governmental power to perfect the revolu- 
tion that must have preceded your conquest 
of the public powers. . . . You must 

[188] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

have come to an understanding that you are 
the sole producers of all wealth/' — "Reform 
or Revolution" by Daniel DeLeon. 

They demand the unconditional surrender 
of the capitalistic system and its system of 
wage slavery. If they have investigated so 
profoundly, one would think that some sort 
of a uniform declaration might be made; so I 
insist that they have no plan. If it is a fact 
that the laboring men are largely in the major- 
ity, why has it taken so much time to perfect 
a socialistic society (for it is about eighty 
years old now, and going at the same rate it 
would take thousands of years more to form 
a socialistic majority) for the purpose of con- 
fiscating the property of — well, I say the 
capitalists; Socialists say "their own." 

I quote the above in order that you may 
compare the ideas of the Socialists of different 
schools. Yet the shading is so gradual one 
can hardly determine any dividing line. 

[i8 9 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Neither Anarchism nor Socialism will ever 
be a success. One cannot define either with 
any degree of stability. They are as shifting 
sands. One cannot find many in either party 
who are willing to act definitely, or otherwise 
than in a hazy sort of way. They seem to be 
as a whip for the body politic. Such, I think, 
is their mission, and a great many will agree 
that the whip is needed badly; but the time 
is coming, and is now close at hand, when its 
punishment will be less severe, as then there 
will be less necessity for this discipline. The 
trades unions have also been of service in this 
same way, which is reflected in our Labor 
Laws, of which the Workmen's Compensation 
Law is the most important. 

In late years we have placed on the statute 
books laws covering the following subjects: 

Industrial Board, 

Bureau of Inspection, 

Bureau of Employment, 

Factories, 

[190] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Bureau of Mediation and Arbitration, 

Mercantile Establishments, 

Workmen's Compensation Law. 

A "Federal Trade Commission Act" was 
passed and in effect September 26, 1914, re- 
quiring five commissioners who were to be 
appointed by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate. This Com- 
mission was appointed for the purpose of as- 
certaining if there were any unfair methods of 
competition in commerce, and, if any were so 
found, they were to be declared unlawful. 

I am in favor of all these laws, and any 
others along these lines, — such as the Minimum 
Wage Law, and Compensation and Pensions for 
the Sick and Old, within certain limits. Either 
these should be federal, or the State laws should 
conform with each other. Possibly they may 
not be wise. I would let the laboring men have, 
within certain limits, the chance to see if these 
laws are suitable to this country. They are 
the laws of other countries, and are being 

[191] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

tried by them. Capitalists and manufactur- 
ers are not so much interested as are the con- 
sumers. 

I fail to see the wisdom of the Socialist doc- 
trine of displacing the capitalists, — the hun- 
dreds and thousands who have made the busi- 
ness in which they are interested a success by 
intelligent management and executive ability 
—the men of ideas, originators of thought, and 
generals of industry — by whom to be replaced 
I really cannot conjecture. Nor have I been 
able to find in the Socialist literature any hint 
of whom they are to be. I have read that 
"some men at the head are there now to stay." 
Do you think men like Elbert H. Gary, Henry 
C. Frick, George W. Perkins, and others of 
the United States Steel Company would be 
willing to give their time under socialistic 
government as they do now? Other men 
would have to fill their places — probably men 
of less ability. In the places of these gentle- 
men, other executive heads, in some way 
[192 J 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

supplied by the Government, must take 
charge. 

The wisest course were not to disturb the 
body politic, but, as I said before, to con- 
fiscate the property of the rich or capitalistic 
class by the income tax and other taxes. I use 
the word "confiscate," though the Socialists 
do not like that word; still it is confiscation 
in effect, even if within the law of our country 
or our State. By such a law it would be 
possible to regulate wealth, trusts, and busi- 
ness generally in the most feasible way. It 
would not discourage personal effort, even to 
the extraction of the bulk of the profits of a 
business, and it would still retain the bene- 
ficial incentive to struggle, — for we develop 
best by so doing. The idea of making every- 
thing easy — the Utopian idea of life spent in 
sunshine with but little struggle — is degener- 
ative. 

My judgment as to the income tax is as 
stated, but the method of taxation now in 
[ 193 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

vogue should be continued, with the exception 
of the personal property tax. This tax should 
be abandoned, and an income tax instituted, 
because the former is not enforced with equity 
to all concerned. The only penalty is for 
making an oath to a false statement. And, 
as the personal property of an individual is, 
to the assessors, largely speculative, they 
guess at the amount and trust to luck, so the 
wealthy escape, while those of moderate means 
are taxed. It is also a poor plan ethically. 

The federal income tax is more exacting, 
and is surrounded by safeguards and penalties 
as follows: 

"That if any person, corporation, joint- 
stock company, association, or insurance com- 
pany liable to make the return or pay the tax 
aforesaid shall refuse or neglect to make 
a return at the time or times hereinbefore 
specified in each year, such person shall be 
liable to a penalty of not less than #20 nor 

[194] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

more than #1,000. Any person or any officer 
of any corporation required by law to make, 
render, sign, or verify any return who makes 
any false or fraudulent return or statement 
with intent to defeat or evade the assessment 
required by this section to be made shall be 
guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be fined 
not exceeding #2,000 or be imprisoned not 
exceeding one year, or both, at the discretion 
of the court, with the costs of prosecution/' 

"When the assessment shall be made, as 
provided in this section, the returns, together 
with any corrections thereof which may have 
been made by the commissioner, shall be filed 
in the office of the Commissioner of Internal 
Revenue and shall constitute public records 
and be open to inspection as such: Provided, 
That any and all such returns shall be open 
to inspection only upon the order of the Presi- 
dent, under rules and regulations to be pre- 
scribed by the Secretary of the Treasury and 
approved by the President: Provided further, 

[195] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

That the proper officers of any State imposing 
a general income tax may, upon the request 
of the governor thereof, have access to said 
returns or to an abstract thereof, showing the 
name and income of each such corporation, 
joint-stock company, association, or insurance 
company, at such times and in such manner 
as the Secretary of the Treasury may pre- 
scribe." 

"If any of the corporations, joint-stock 
companies or associations, or insurance com- 
panies aforesaid, shall refuse or neglect to 
make a return at the time or times herein- 
before specified in each year, or shall render a 
false or fraudulent return, such corporation, 
joint-stock company or association, or insur- 
ance company shall be liable to a penalty of 
not exceeding #10,000." 

I am aware of the arguments used against 
the federal income tax, that, owing to similar 
taxes laid by the different States, it is double 
taxation, and that it reaches the earnings of 

[196] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

not only real but personal property. It seems 
to me, however, that this tax is as just as the 
federal law overruling former State laws, that 
all male citizens shall have the suffrage, irre- 
spective of their race or condition. And I do 
not agree with all that Adam Smith, John 
Stuart Mill, or Henry George have said upon 
the inadvisability of taxing certain forms of 
wealth. Even political economy, as a science, 
must pass through evolutionary stages. The 
income tax is new in this country, though old 
in others, where it has been found to operate 
well and satisfactorily. 

Most capitalists will do what they can to pre- 
vent the enactment of laws of displacement, of 
capital, but if they are wise they will take into 
consideration the fact that wealth is concen- 
trating in fewer hands, and that if this process 
is continued, the rich may rightly come to be 
regarded as "the foes of the human family," 
and their power as a cause of universal pop- 
ular discontent. 

[197] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

The following statistics are taken from 
"Labor and Other Capital/' by Edward 
Kellogg: 

In Massachusetts, in 1840, there was a 
population of 737,700. The entire wealth of 
the State was #299,880,338; 16,120 persons in 
the State were estimated as worth $161, 855,000, 
so that 2\ per cent, of the population possessed 
a little more than one half the wealth of the 
whole State. In Boston it was said that 224 
men were worth an average of #321,781 each. 
To-day, seventy-five years later, it is estimated 
that one third of 1 per cent, of the population 
of the United States is worth one third of the 
real and personal property. This shows, tak- 
ing Massachusetts in 1840 as a fair illustration 
(for we have not any statistics to guide us 
as to the wealth of the United States and the 
wealth of the individual in all the States in 
1840), that capital and money have concen- 
trated in that time from z\ per cent., owned by 
one half of the population, to about one third 

[198] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

of i per cent., owned by one third. This esti- 
mate will give you an idea of the rapid concen- 
tration of wealth now taking place. (The total 
capital of farmers as per United States 1910 
census was #40,991,449,000, which was about 
one fourth of the value of the real and personal 
property in the United States.) 

The above calculation is made on the basis 
that #187,739,071,090 is the estimated value 
of real and personal property in the United 
States in 191 2. One third of this would be 
about #62,600,000,000; 6\ per cent, income 
of this (which I figure is a fair return on 
this investment) would amount to about 
#4,000,000,000. This corresponds to the in- 
come of 357,600 persons reporting each on 
an income of #3,500 and over; 357,600 people 
are about one third of 1 per cent, of the 
100,000,000 population of the United States. 

I think our Government should take care 
of the unemployed. I am speaking now for 
all ; for the rich of to-day may be the poor of 
[ 199] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

to-morrow, or, at any rate, their children 
may be. If our Government can call upon 
us for protection in war, why can it not take 
care of us in times of peace? or in times of 
war, assist us to a living? It seems to me that 
the most important object has been neglected. 
We spend millions to protect ourselves from 
a foreign enemy, but not a cent for protection 
from this enemy within our own borders — the 
most destructive of all, for it is constantly in 
our presence. If we were taxed on income for 
this purpose, we might be more interested in 
the supply of employees. 

Recently a day was set apart as " People's 
Donation Day," for the unemployed in a 
western New York city. The following is a 
quotation from one of the newspapers : 

"This city has shared, with other cities, in 
the saddened home where hope has contended 
with the despair that unemployment, through 
no fault of one's own, brings to the man and 
the woman wage-earner. 
[ 200 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

"They are willing to work, but there is no 
work for them to do. That tells the story of 
the posters, seen all last week and again to- 
day in street-car and store window. The 
workman stands with his little family. His 
hands, powerful arms and shoulders repre- 
sent his years of hard toil for that family. 
And you may read in his face the struggle that 
an unexpected poverty has brought him. 

"His child appeals — a school-girl, needing 
clothes and shoes — needing more than that — 
the proper nourishment for the work she is 
expected to do as a growing child. But her 
cup may not be filled again as in other days. 
The wife, pale, shrunken, worn, from her 
struggle, leans against the provider who has 
not before failed. In her arms is the little 
one to hold the home together at any cost, 
even in this trial. The workman himself does 
not ask. The appeal has been made for 
him." 

About #12,000 was raised, which, if there 
[201 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

were 4,000 heads of families unemployed, would 
amount to #3 each ! If you are not ashamed 
of such a lack of feeling and appreciation, 
I am; for, if each of the families in the city had 
given fifteen cents, they would have raised this 
amount. No, that is not the proper method. 
It is demoralizing to permit people to imagine 
that, by giving this paltry amount, they have 
squared their responsibilities to their fellow- 
men. The only way to accomplish any 
lasting good is for those in authority so to legis- 
late that this burning disgrace may be pre- 
vented. 

I am not offering any plan. That is the 
office of Congress. And one thing looks 
ominous : if our Government does not contain 
men of executive ability, competent to do 
this, how can the Socialists expect to form a 
government with men of executive ability 
to do a more stupendous thing? (One may 
say "afford at least another chance for cor- 
ruption and graft.") If this is really so, then 
[ 202 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

what do our Socialist friends suppose would 
occur if finance, manufacturing, farming, 
etc., were all put under government, or any 
other democratic control? 



The Stability 
of a Republic Rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



[203] 



EDUCATION 



CHAPTER VIII 

EDUCATION 

Education, however worn or hopeless the 
topic, is the star that is to guide this world to 
as near Utopia as possible. Plato has said, 
"The aim of education is to develop in the 
body and in the soul all the beauty and all 
the perfection of which they are capable. " 
Of course, conditions at his time were different 
from those of to-day. Men lived a life of 
culture and leisure but not of luxury, and they 
pursued knowledge for its own sake (although 
Socrates did not !) ; but this could be the lot of 
only the few. We are now living in a more 
complex industrial age; we are more practical, 
but we cannot overlook (for our mental facul- 
ties are much the same) their deep philo- 
sophical insight. We have to do with vaster 
[207] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

numbers of people in a democratic republic, 
where all should be so educated as to live 
wisely, but the aim of education should be 
much the same to-day as it was in Socrates', 
Plato's, and Aristotle's time. I venture to 
place, as the most important education of 
to-day, moral education — not the sentimental 
kind, but the noble, manly, vigorous sort of 
morality that means just what it says, and 
has the vitality to penetrate all hearts. No 
government can long endure without this 
force back of it. I need only to remind the 
intelligent reader of ancient and modern his- 
tory of this most vital fact: that when the 
morals of a people become weakened by the 
disregard of the laws of virtue, they soon be- 
come a retrograde people. 

"Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, 
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay." 

— Goldsmith. 

If we are to have better laws, they must be 

based on better morals, for that means more 

[208] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

justice, "equality of opportunity," or " lib- 
erty/' "equality," "fraternity." By teach- 
ing morals, we may discover brilliant minds. 
By teaching correct morals, the people will 
realize the joy and pleasure of doing the cor- 
rect thing, and the hideousness of doing the 
incorrect thing. Through teaching morals, 
immorality would become obnoxious. Capi- 
talists would be considered immoral if their 
wealth were not used for the benefit of the 
greatest number; and instead of it being a 
pleasure to collect large fortunes, it would 
be a curse and reproach. 

Theology should not enter into moral teach- 
ing in our public schools. The systems of 
theology should be of individual concern, and 
especially so in this country, where our people 
are so heterogeneous. 

It would seem that if we were guided by the 

four cardinal virtues: wisdom, justice, courage, 

and temperance, and could frame a code of 

morals so simple and direct that it would fit 

[209] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the natures of almost all our people, it could 
be made practical and of service instead of a 
gymnastic for philosophers and other thinkers. 
The best philosophers have agreed that virtue 
is essential to happiness. You will admit that 
this means a great deal, and presents a founda- 
tion to build upon. We should have learned 
that fortune has little to do with real pleasure 
— that the pleasure and pain of the mind mean 
more than the gratification of the body. This 
does not refer to the educated mind (as we 
think of it), but does mean that we must so 
educate the mind that wisdom shall control or 
gain a victory over the temptations of life — 
such as pride, vainglory, anger, gluttony, 
unchastity, and envy. 

You will notice a great deal said in the ad- 
dresses of our Presidents and governors of the 
morals of our people — urging that this unrest 
comes from "moral decadence"; and yet not 
a serious step is taken, other than in behalf 
of temperance, to improve the morals of the 
[210] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

^— ^— ■— ■— — — — — — ^ ^ 5SSSSB 

children in public schools at the period of the 
child's life that is most receptive. A code of 
morals should be formulated that would fit 
the child of from eight to twelve years of age, 
and also one for those from twelve to sixteen. 
These codes of morals should be formulated 
by educators of the highest intelligence and 
experience. 

Next of importance is the public school 
course up to the age of fourteen years. Next 
in order should come the industrial schools — 
trade schools, schools for agriculture, me- 
chanic arts and home-keeping — part-time or 
continuation schools, and evening vocational 
schools. The child should begin at the age of 
from eight to ten, and spend, say, from thirty 
minutes to one hour each day at industrial 
training through all the public school period. 
The children desiring to continue should be 
able to do so in the industrial high schools. 
At the age mentioned, they are able to handle 
the ordinary tools without danger. At this 
[211] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

time both the boys and girls are at the im- 
pressionable age. They can learn quickly. 
At the same time, it diversifies their time, so 
that other studies will not be such a drudgery. 
I understand the figures of the National 
Board of Education to show that of the boys 
that are in the public schools at eight, not 
over one in twelve ever enters the high school, 
and that the majority of the boys in the United 
States have received all their education by the 
time they are twelve years of age ; this is due 
to the necessity of earning their own bread or 
that of their families; also to the fact that 
the schools are made so unattractive to the 
children that they prefer to go to work. 

The competition for foreign trade makes it 
necessary to educate our youth in these arts 
of industrial life, which must be supplied with 
workers having both general and technical 
training. 

Next of importance in the public school 
course is civil government. The highly or- 
[212] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

ganized educational systems of France and 
Prussia (as representing Germany) are mani- 
festly suitable for the purpose of a general 
study of the principles of educational polity 
(civil government) as worked out upon logical 
and consistent plans. I think civil govern- 
ment should be taught to boys as early in life 
as possible, say, to the younger scholars, by an 
election carried on by the boys for the designa- 
tion of city, State, and United States officials, 
with an explanation of what each office 
signifies. The various offices could be made 
attractive by emblems of different design for 
the boys to wear. They could formally ad- 
dress each other as President, Senator, Gov- 
ernor, Mayor, etc. I advise this, for the 
reason that so few of our young men seem to 
have any idea of how our government is 
operated. In a democratic republic where we 
expect all to have a vote in the management 
of the government, we should see to it that 
our children are familiar with the details of 
[213 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

— 

its administration. It may seem to belittle 
its importance to make play of such a serious 
thing, but I can only say that what one learns 
at from eight to fourteen he seldom forgets. 
I learned how to telegraph at the age of 
twelve by playing with other boys on a tele- 
graph line, and to this day, although that 
was a great many years ago, I can "send" 
and "receive" messages about as rapidly as I 
could then. 

There should be developed in a child a just 
pride of his being a little man or little woman. 
Children should be taught to love to be clean 
inside and out; they should be taught to ob- 
serve these things for their own good, and to 
realize that to do otherwise is unwise. 

Instruction regarding the nature of alco- 
holic drinks, narcotics, and their effects on the 
human system is now compulsory in our State. 
Not less than three lessons a week for ten 
weeks must be given. "In normal schools, 
teachers' training classes, and teachers' insti- 
[214] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

tutes adequate time and attention shall be 
given to the method of teaching this branch, 
and no teacher shall be licensed who has not 
passed a satisfactory examination on the sub- 
ject and the best method of teaching it/' 
You will observe that instruction is thus given 
in temperance. This is one of the four car- 
dinal virtues. Why not go a little farther and 
teach the other three — wisdom, justice, and 
courage? — certainly of as much importance. 
Does it not seem strange that we should have 
taken up the last of these four, i. e., temper- 
ance, without any design, apparently? But, 
on the other hand, it is the logical starting- 
point, for next is courage; next justice, and, 
finally, wisdom. 

The order in which I think education should 
follow is: Moral, general, industrial, and civic, 
all of which should be taught to the children 
as stated, at not less than eight years, up to 
fourteen years of age, the impressionable pe- 
riod. 

[215] 



A CAPITALIST'S VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

I take this opportunity to congratulate 
those having charge of our educational system 
of the State of New York on the decrease of 
45 per cent, in illiteracy from 1900 to 1910. 
That is something one should be proud of; 
and the money spent to do this was well 
spent. 

When we contemplate the wickedness and 
degradation in our State (and other States), 
and know that these are largely due to the lack 
of self-control and higher ideals, and that we 
can reach such faults by the early education of 
our children, by imparting to them a knowledge 
of themselves; when one calls to mind the 
centring of wealth in the hands of the few, the 
extravagance of our age, the unrest and so- 
cialistic tendency of our people, the increase of 
divorce cases, the fact that, as J. D. Buck, 
M. D., says in "Soul and Sex," "80 per cent, of 
blindness in children is due to diseased par- 
ents," one then reflects on what our duty is. 
Surely something is wrong somewhere, for 

[216] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

we cannot build reform schools, workhouses, 
and asylums fast enough to supply the need. 

"New York State's penal population is in- 
creasing at double the ratio of its entire popu- 
lation. Figures compiled from the new census 
show this somewhat surprising and discon- 
certing fact. 

"According to the official figures the popu- 
lation of all the penal institutions in the State, 
including the State prisons, reformatories, 
and penitentiaries and the penal institutions 
of New York City, is shown to have increased 
about 30 per cent, in the past five years, rising 
from 13,315 to 17,352. 

"During the same time the population of 
the State has increased about 15 per cent., 
advancing from 9,113,654 in 1910 to between 
10,250,000 and 10,500,000 in 191 5. 

"In the New York city institutions the 

increase is a trifle more than 41 per cent., in 

the penitentiaries about 36 per cent., and in 

the State prisons just under 12 per cent., while 

[217] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

the reformatories show an increase of between 
12 and 13 per cent." 

And this is our boasted civilization ! 

We are all going to school. Our school is 
the world, and our teacher is Experience. It 
is impossible to procure a more competent 
instructor. The best society is a democratic 
republic. It is utilitarian, "a government of 
the people by the people for the people." 
When one contemplates the truth, — that im- 
planted in every one is a desire for justice, 
a general desire for peace, a dislike for war, 
admiration for the generous, a dislike of sel- 
fishness, pride, ostentation, anger, gluttony, 
and uncleanliness; when we know that envy 
will pull us down rather than build us up,— it 
seems strange that we have been unable to 
change society to any considerable extent. 
At least, we think the process very dila- 
tory. We differ a great deal in our methods 
of bringing about "the brotherhood of man." 
This is the reason why there are so many 
[218] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

forms of education; why so many societies 
are brought to life; and why we have so many 
philanthropies. 

Let us recall some of these philanthropies 
and societies. According to the Statistics 
of the United States Census, they include the 
following : 

For the sick 2,492 

For care of children i>435 

Home for adults and children 1*151 

Societies for protection of children .... 205 

For blind and deaf 125 

5,408 

In 4,815 of these institutions 2,960,000 
persons were received; 4,281 reported an in- 
come of #1 18,380,000; and 3,871 show property 
value of $643,878,000. 

Outside of the above, there are church and 
private philanthropic work and great numbers 
of societies, with over 15,000,000 members, 
such as Masons, Odd Fellows, Modern Wood- 
men, Knights of Pythias, Red Men, Elks, 
[219] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

Eagles, Knights of Columbus, Royal Arcanum, 
Maccabees and various others, who expend 
from #90,000,000 to #100,000,000 annually 
(see the "World Almanac/' 1915, page 563). 

All our educational, philanthropic, and 
social institutions have not yet brought about 
a satisfactory state of affairs. We have still 
the poor, the unemployed, and the discon- 
tented. 

While I am not likely to be tested, and while 
I certainly would not care to be singular in the 
test, I think I could freely surrender my for- 
tune to the management of an approved body 
of wise legislators — men obviously and osten- 
sibly of high ideals and right living, and com- 
petent and sagacious in worldly affairs, and 
so affording the assurance that my family and 
dependents would be secure in the enjoyment, 
or at least in the possession, of the comforts 
of "the simple life." I believe that under 
such a regime the race would be better con- 
tented than it is to-day; the ambition and the 
[ 220 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

strain, now so exacting for even a moderate 
success, could find expression in the uplift 
of society, in the development of our talents, 
and in the enjoyment of the approval of our 
fellowmen; but human nature must be re- 
generated socially. This will adjust econom- 
ics. 

I submit that such a life would be higher 
and worthier, for both me and mine, than is 
the selfish accumulation of a wealth the pos- 
session of which usually involves the depri- 
vation of others, and inures only to the social 
prestige and ungenerous exaltation of our 
own family position. Even though, under the 
wheel of Fortune, wealth is often transitory 
from the hands for which its producer intended 
it, the transition often leaves a trail of suffer- 
ing and moral decadence, the heritage of a 
weak-minded and even imbecile posterity. 

I do not regard this as a plea for Socialism 
— the doctrines of which I have endeavored 
to refute — but rather as the ideal of a pure 
[221] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

democracy, a name older than Socialism, even 
in America. Its propaganda need not be 
destructive, but rather remedial. Men do 
not amputate a limb for a merely local dis- 
order, but rather cure and harmonize it in the 
bodily health. We do not need new parties 
nor party names. Men are impatient; they 
expect from agitation in one brief era results 
which nature requires centuries to produce. 
There are two great parties, the Republican 
and the Democratic, either of which is com- 
petent, as an organization, for any purpose of 
practical reform. Especially we have no 
need, merely for the novelty of a "Socialistic" 
slogan, to raise a new standard of opposition 
— a thing specially gratifying to capitalists 
as such, for they well know that a house 
divided against itself is foredoomed to fall. 

Democracy, rightly understood, is synony- 
mous with Progress, and acquaintance with 
history assures an infinite faith in it. We may 
prophesy, with a degree of rational certainty, 
[ 222 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

that kingdoms and empires will vanish, and 
that Democracy will live and flourish through- 
out the world. 

As at Frankfort, in 1848, the German Con- 
federation was on the verge of declaring in 
favor of a republic, and Hungary was up in 
arms, so it seems possible that these countries 
may each make declaration in favor of a re- 
public after this present war. 

A better state of affairs is sure to come on 
this earth. Its prospect is not altogether 
visionary, sentimental, or aesthetic, but re- 
flects good, hard, practical common sense. 
We have the forecast of it in our natures now, 
but seek to hide it through false pride; yet 
there is surely a day coming when it will be a 
delight for one to permit his own inner self to 
come to the surface, and then we shall have 
more temperance, more courage, more justice, 
and more wisdom. Do not think, my reader, 
that this will come without struggle. It will 
take our best efforts, our most vigorous man- 
[223 ] 



A CAPITALISTS VIEW OF SOCIALISM 

hood and womanhood, but in these will be our 
joy. Do not think society will ever become 
Utopia. Do not be extravagant in your expec- 
tations. We shall always attest human frailty, 
but things will be better, and the degree of 
melioration will depend upon the individual 
character of the people. 



The Stability 
of a Republic Rests on the 
Morality and Intelligence 

of the Voters 



THE END 




THE COUNTRY LIFE PRESS 
GARDEN CITY, N. Y. 



